You and Broomstick One are going down.
Posted on 10/21/2009 8:53:29 AM PDT by freespirited
New CBO numbers may have sealed the deal. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is preparing to move ahead with a "robust" public option--one that reimburses hospitals and providers at Medicare rates, plus five percent--in the House's health care bill. She is briefing her caucus about the plan's savings tonight, and, pending the approval of a sufficient majority of members, will adopt the measure as part of the complete reform package.
The analysis finds the reconstituted House proposal to be deficit neutral, and require less than $900 billion (reportedly around $870 billion) in new spending, over ten years.
The bill remains nominally more expensive than the Senate Finance Committee proposal, but would cover 96 percent of all Americans, providing greater bang for each federal dollar spent. And, aides note, the bill that comes to the floor of the Senate will be a hybrid of the Finance and more expensive HELP Committee bills, so the price is expected to rise.
The move is sure to make progressives ecstatic, and puts Senate leaders, who have been unable to reach any decisions about their preferences for a public option in their own bill, in an uncomfortable position.
In recent days, Pelosi has insisted that she intends to send House negotiators to a health care conference committee with the maximum possible leverage for the public option. And House health care principals have been working doggedly to keep the price of reform down with the help of the public option--so in a sense, the news of this final push comes as little surprise: Pelosi is, as expected, using the fiscal responsibility of the robust public option to win over enough skeptics in her caucus to pass it. And she is, reportedly, very close to doing that.
By tying reimbursement rates to Medicare, the government would be able to spend less money per individual on subsidies in the health insurance exchanges. One of the major critiques of the Senate Finance bill is that the spending totals are kept low by denying subsidies to middle income Americans, and without providing a systemic corrective to insurance industry waste and abuse. In the House bill, greater subsidies, and the public option address that issue.
Malarkey. The govt will never get that kind of participation.
Obviously this was the plan all along, the tea parties did not matter to her, the support of (or lack of) congressmen and senators did not matter, the will of the people does not matter.
Is this one another of those accounting tricks that accumulates revenue for 10 years, but the costs only cover 6 or 7 years of benefits?
This has to be a trick, otherwise it would have be rolled out long ago?
insurance industry, now is the time to bring out the attack ads. Otherwise start working on your resumes....
I thought there were secret negotiations to increase reimbursement rates (or at least not impose the price controls). Another day, another plan. Can anyone spare a dime for a new plan?
I dont know, but if I had to guess, I’d say yes. Same accounting shenanigans.
All of their plans are a trick. Once they get a plan out there, no matter what it is, can lead to a govt takeover.
They arent paying attention to those who were at tea parties, marches and the millions who called, emailed or wrote their congress people.
Pelosi claims “THEY won the election”. To her, this means, they can do anything they damn please, and we should all shut up and march in line.
This plan..any plan, with be a disaster for dems supporters also..only they are too stupid to see it yet. If it wasnt so devistating for the rest of us..I would love to see them get their wish. They deserve it.
Rowland Burris, or as we lovingly refer to him here in Chicago - Winnie the Boo - obviously has her worried.
Nancy,
Keep your laws off my BODY!
“Sorry there are just too many plans being floated to keep them all straight”
That’s the idea...
That is the mystery, why hasn't Big Med been more vocal and forceful in opposition to ObamaCare?
Are we sure that the insurance companies and medical providers and suppliers are not in on the reform scam? New sources of revenue (your taxes) for them to exploit? What is good for the bottom line is not always good for America and the freedom of its citizens.
The further left the House bill is, the better. Insurance companies want the House bill (and conference report) to have the public option, b/c it will be a poison pill in the Senate and therefore the entire monstrosity will be defeated on the Senate floor.
You and Broomstick One are going down.
Patriots prepare for a robust restoration of our government.
Insurance companies, big Pharma, docs and medical device companies all struck, or attempted to strike, a self-serving and independent deal with the Administration earlier this year. All have been duped, and they now realize it — making a pact with the Devil rarely works out. This Administration is nothing but a bunch of scheming liars. All of the aforenoted industries will oppose Obamacare. They are waiting on TV advertising because there is no need to spend any money yet... public support for Obamacare is dropping, not gaining. They are also waiting on the election results on Nov 3.
... Nancy Pelosi is preparing to move ahead with a “robust” public option....
And voters are preparing a “robust” kick in the ass option for the Skank in Charge.....
If the public option is included in a bill signed by Obama, that will be the first step towards a complete government takeover of our health care system. If that takeover happens, you’ll see the following results caused by basic economics and Washington politics:
1) If health care becomes free or almost free for everyone because of tax-payer funded government subsidies, then demand for health care services will increase greatly. More people will show up at doctors’ offices with a minor backache or a slight sore throat or just because they’re lonely and they need to get out of the house and talk to someone today. The health care system will quickly become overloaded with people seeking nearly-free health care, and the cost of the government-run health care system will explode to a cost way above all forecasts by the White House and the CBO. (It’s called a demand curve in economics. Do you remember that from Econ 1, Ms. Pelosi?)
2) As the costs explode way beyond all forecasts, just as the cost of medicare has done, congress will be forced to control those costs in some way, and the path of least resistance politically is to attack the health care professionals and owners of facilities for “greed and excessive compensation.” Congress would then cut reimbursements for doctors’ fees and facilities costs, instead of requiring patients to pay more for each visit to Gubmint-run health offices. This would result in lower incomes for doctors and nurses, which cuts the financial incentive for staying in the medical profession and would push many doctors and nurses into early retirement or cause them to quit the medical profession forever. Why be a doctor if your income is limited to $100K for a GP and $200K for a specialist if you can go get an MBA and become a hedge fund manager and make $5 million per year? Why put up with lawyers suing you for malpractice just to make $200K? It might make more sense to join the other side and become a lawyer who makes $2 million a year suing corporations for product liability or patent violations...(settling out of court every time because of shaky evidence.) The end result would be that some of the most talented physicians would quit the profession and the brightest college students would be much less likely to choose medicine as a career and instead would go into business and law and become corporate entrepreneurs. The end result of greater demand for medical services and lower pay for doctors would be a drain of people and talent out of the medical profession, shortages of doctors, somewhat less competent physicians, rationing of health care, long wait times for surgeries and specialty procedures, and ultimately many thousands of unnecessary deaths among the American people and much unnecessary suffering.
So in the end, this is killer legislation that would kill thousands of people, all because Pelosi and other socialists are perturbed by the “immoral profits” made by health insurance companies. She actually did use the term “immoral profits” made by health insurance companies. (Does Pelosi think all corporate profits are immoral? I think that’s likely, which puts her right in there with Lenin politically.)
This is basic economics, and this exact scenario has already happened in Britain and Canada. You just don’t hear much about the end results because these results are covered up by the left-leaning mainstream news media (just as they’ve covered up most of the ongoing horror show in Cuba for fifty years.) We need to hold the line here and stop this public option to save our health care system and save thousands of lives at the same time.
True !
I have tried not to get all “wound around the axle” like some posters I seen about the Bacus bill, etc - knowing that at some point these all had to be merged before knowing how bad of a mess had been made
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.