ON THE HILL: Summary of Amendments Considered in Senate Finance Committee Markup
Posted by The Campaign on September 30, 2009 at 8:14 PM
Below please find a summary of the amendments considered during today's Senate Finance Committee markup:
ICYMI: What Does WV Coal Miner Have to Say About a Plan to Tax High Cost Health Plans?
Posted by The Campaign on September 30, 2009 at 7:53 PM
See what a West Virginia coal miner has to say about a plan to tax high cost health care plans:
"A lot of my people died, in explosions or whatever, in order to get what we got. I think, seriously, if they try to tax the miners' health plan, Congress is going to hear from us. We might need to go up there and enlighten 'em."
-- Fred J. Myers, an 81-year-old retired coal miner in Morgantown, W.Va.
(The Washington Post, What Makes a Health Plan a 'Cadillac'?, 10/01/09)
ICYMI: Washington Post -- What Makes a Health Plan a 'Cadillac'?
Posted by The Campaign on September 30, 2009 at 7:42 PM
The Washington Post takes a deeper look at the issue of what exactly a "cadillac" health plan is.
Here are some key excerpts from the article:
"Many proponents of taxing high-end employer-based coverage have singled out the titans of Wall Street finance and industry, whose insurance might pay for regular EKGs, CAT-scans and weekend health retreats at tony spas..But insurance plans that cover those types of things are rare. More common are the generous health benefits that many union workers receive -- plans with high employer-paid premiums, low deductibles, prescription drugs, vision and dental care, and low or no co-payments."
"Over the past decade or so, unions in contract negotiations typically chose to forgo large wage increases in exchange for more generous medical benefits, mainly because costs were rising faster than inflation. Now, as the Senate Finance Committee works on health-care legislation, union members say they feel unfairly targeted."
"'It's the old Washington, D.C., law of unintended consequences,' said Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a consulting firm. 'They went after the Goldman Sachs partner and they ended up with the fireman in Brooklyn.'"
Senator Jay Rockefeller: "Taxing these higher priced insurance plans is simply unacceptable."
For the full article, click here.
ICYMI: What They Are Saying about the Government-run Plan
Posted by The Campaign on September 30, 2009 at 6:08 AM
Here's a sampling of what some Senate Finance Committee members had to say about the government-run plan yesterday:
Senator Kent Conrad: "'Every hospital in my state goes broke' under the Rockefeller approach...'I can't possibly support an amendment that does that.'" (The Washington Post, 09/30/09)
Senator Blanche Lincoln: "...said she supported efforts to cover the uninsured and to protect consumers by imposing strict new federal rules on insurance companies. But she said Congress could achieve those goals 'without creating a purely public new government program, which most Arkansans do not support.'" (The New York Time, 09/30/2009)
Senator Chuck Grassley: "The government is not a competitor. It is a predator." (Los Angeles Times, 09/30/2009)
Senator John Ensign: "Does anybody believe Congress would let this public plan go away once it has a constituency? No way. Once it's started, you will never get rid of it. Congress will subsidize it more and more, allow it to grow and grow." (The New York Time, 09/30/2009)
ICYMI: Study shows negative impact of government-run plan on hospitals
Posted by The Campaign on September 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM
The journal Health Affairs recently published an article examining the effects of a government-run plan on hospitals nationwide. Here are some key findings from the paper: For the full article check it out here. The authors of this study base their analysis on a "cost shift paradigm" which states that as some payers pay less, other must pay more and agree with the Milliman Inc. analysis that finds that on a national basis, Medicare and Medicaid reimburse physicians, hospitals and other providers on average, for only 85 cents of every dollar they spend on patient care.The study finds that if the government-run plan were to pay at Medicare rates, or at Medicare plus 10 percent, these payments would further intensify the financial pressures exerted on hospitals from existing Medicare and Medicaid payment levels.As hospital patient-revenue margins decrease due to the presence of a government-run plan, hospitals are likely to intensify their cost shift to private pay patients.However, it is assumed that the presence of a government-run plan with low payment rates could attract a large number of those with private coverage to the government-run option. With an eroding private pay patient base, there will be fewer individuals over which hospitals can spread the burden of cost shift.The authors find that when the government-run plan reallocates 90 percent of the uninsured and 75 percent of the privately insured at Medicare rates plus 10 percent, the cost shift pressure on private premiums will triple.
ICYMI: The Washington Post on Level-playing Field and Government-run Health Care
Posted by The Campaign on September 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM
The Washington Post – “It is difficult to imagine a truly level playing field that would simultaneously produce benefits from a government-run system.”[i]
ICYMI: CBO Director Doug Elmendorf on Level-playing Field and Government-run Plans
Posted by The Campaign on September 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Doug Elmendorf, Director of the Congressional Budget Office – “More generally in health care reform, when people talk about public plans competing with private plans, I think designing a system in which a public plan could compete on a level playing field is extremely difficult.”[i]
FACT CHECK: Health Plan Profits and Administrative Costs
Posted by The Campaign on September 29, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Today's Senate Finance Committee markup focused on health plan profits and administrative costs. Here are the facts about these two issues:
For every dollar our nation spends on health care, less than one penny goes towards health plan profits. A sincere cost-containment discussion would focus on the other 99 cents. Check out this document which sets-the-record-straight about health plan profits. Also, check out Fortune Magazine's recent industry profitability rankings. In 2008, health plans had a profit margin of 2.2% and are 35th on the list.
As part of the Fortune 500 list, Fortune magazine looks at industry profit margin. Fortune reports that the "Health Care: Insurance and Managed Care" sector had a profit margin of 2.2% in 2008. To see where this puts the health plan industry on the list, click here.
The Heritage Foundation released a research paper comparing administrative costs between Medicare and private health plans.
Two important facts to consider: *****
ICYMI: Former Senator Bill Frist Endorses a Personal Coverage Requirement
Posted by The Campaign on September 28, 2009 at 6:14 PM
In a must read piece in US News & World Report, former Senator Bill Frist, a heart surgeon and the former U.S. Senate majority leader, argues why a personal coverage requirement is critical as part of any health care reform legislation.
He writes:
"The argument for an individual mandate centers on three principles. First, it would achieve fairness...Second, it would eliminate wasteful cost-shifting...Third, it would reduce adverse selection."
To read the full argument, click here.
MUST SEE TV: Watch CBS News Explore the Exploding Costs of CT Scans and MRIs
Posted by The Campaign on September 25, 2009 at 1:30 PM
CBS News has an in depth look at the potential overuse of CT Scans and MRIs. One key fact from the story:
"The annual price tag for imaging? $100 billon. And experts estimate 35 percent of these tests aren't even necessary. That's potentially $35 billion wasted every year."
Watch the full story below:
