The analysis below only highlights the negative aspects of this bill, but those are the aspects that are not being publicly discussed. Love it, hate it, look it up, analyze it or research it for yourself, and decide for yourself, what to do about this. I’m just suggesting "Eyes Wide Open".

When the term "public option" has become so general or amorphous that it can be read to mean anything that anyone wants it to mean, it is not only useless, it can be dangerous.

HR3200/HELP Committee Bill (which seems to be what is going to be pushed even by "progressives" in the senate) has lots of goodies in it that no one is talking about.

It features :

An insurance exchange as the main "solution" for a "public option". An insurance exchange is private insurance companies getting together to offer a selection of policies obtainable through the government (with the government setting some standards of cost and who they have to cover). Under this format the government analyzes your finances and determines what you will pay per month, then gives you a choice of private insurance policies to choose from depending on what "tier" of coverage you qualify for. The money you pay goes directly to the private insurance companies and the rest of what the private insurer charges for that policy is paid to them by the government (if you qualify for an insurance subsidy).

Subsidies for the exchange, paid to the insurance companies, which means everyone will be paying Big Insurance twice.

and/or Tax credits (meaning even though you can’t pay your bills now, you have to pay the insurance companies anyway and maybe you’ll get money back later on your already too-complicated-for-humans tax return, if you prove and report those payments properly).

Mandatory enrollment for citizens.

Penalties for people that don’t sign up because they can’t afford it or simply don’t want to enrich the insurance companies.

No mandatory participation from healthcare providers.

A pathetic provision for possible "state insurance" (co-ops!) in it (also being referred to as "public option"!) that is funded strictly by premiums paid into it by its participants in that state. Not only would a creature like that be far too weak to "keep private insurance honest" and would be too small to negotiate meaningful discounts. It is the equivalent of a small start-up homeowners insurance company trying to operate without the back up of the massive resources of a parent company nor any re-insurance to back it up in the case of massive claims. That homeowners insurance company, by law, would not be allowed to operate. This brilliant idea is in both this bill and the "bi-partisan compromise" bill.

And, of course, tiers! No plan would be complete without class distinctions.

Logistics of vetting 100+ million peoples’ finances to decide what they qualify for? Not a problem!

It’ll be the gift that keeps on giving!

This is the bill that is now being referred to as a "hybrid" (doesn’t that sound new, hip and eco-friendly!) because it has two! ways for the public to pay for coverage!

Using the words "public option" can now be construed as meaning any perverted definition of "public option" that suits the politicians. The term has come to mean anything that involves making coverage "available" to people that don’t have insurance.

By the way, BOTH senate bills (HR3200 & the "bi-partisan compromise" bill) include mandatory participation for citizens.

Yeah! Aetna’s up 12%.

Here’s a link to the summary: http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BILLSUMMARY-071409.pdf

The vast majority of what I’ve said (above) can be found here, you just have to read it and know what it is that you’re reading. The things that are in my description that are not in this summary, I’ve found from reading analysis of individual components of this 1000+ page bill.

The key to understanding this bill is to educate yourself to understand what an insurance exchange is and how it actually works in general, and with credits/subsidies, and also what a co-op actually is and how it works, so that you can recognize it when it’s being called something else.

Incidentally, you can find near the beginning, that the possible "state insurance"/"public option" (aka state co-op) may only be offered in "areas of the country" (meaning states, since it is state public insurance) where only a couple private insurance companies hold a monopoly; making this "public option"/co-op component even weaker than anyone has imagined. And why, after this wonderful insurance exchange is being offered, would a couple private insurers still have a monopoly in some states, creating the additional need for a "state insurance"/"public option" co-op, you might ask? Because there is no mandatory provider participation. Which means that in some places, even with an exchange, there might still be monopolies. If you notice, the summary also talks about the option of individual state insurance exchanges also, versus a national exchange.

Why do I say it’s mandatory participation for citizens? Well, if you don’t sign up for insurance (public, private, exchange, whatever) because you can’t afford it or you simply refuse to enrich the insurance companies or you just want to be left alone, there is a penalty. That would make it mandatory. And how would they know that you didn’t sign up so that they can enforce a penalty? Because you wouldn’t be able to show proof on your income tax. This, of course, further complicates tax returns but is the only way to ensure everyone in America pays the insurance companies that will be providing insurance through the insurance exchanges.

So…. the "bi-partisan compromise" bill from the senate finance committee has co-ops.

….And the "hybrid" HR3200 bill from the HELP committee has a component for possible "state insurance", which is co-op being called "state insurance".

Now, this is just conjecture, but ever since it was confirmed that the "bi-partisan" bill has co-ops, the pols (including Barney Frank and Jay Rockefeller among many others) are now running around saying that co-ops are a bad idea to every camera they can find. (Who wouldn’t? They are a bad idea.) I’m guessing that when it comes time for these two bills to be "reconciled", the co-op language will be removed from both bills and all that will be left is the insurance exchange and mandatory citizen participation (which is also in both bills)…. And idiots all across America will rejoice because we "dodged the bullet of co-ops"! I think it’s a set-up that’s being well-orchestrated.

Cynical? Absolutely. Possible? Absolutely. ?

Tracie

Tracie

69 Comments