Rough Sledding for Medicare Expansion

[Winter_123]

Maybe Harry "Transparency" Reid can just pull some other proposal out of his arse and flop it out for consideration. How long has it been been since we heard about the medicare expansion proposal - a week or ten days?

"We will have the entire health care debate and proposals broadcast on C-Span." Candidate Barack Obama.

Medicare buy-in plan runs into Senate resistance - Yahoo! News

 

[Mac1958]

This idea has had me shaking my head since I first heard about it. The politicians blurt it out like it's some kind of panacea, and the public immediately jumps on board with goo goo eyes and a song in their heart. So, to these people, I would say something like this:

Hey, folks, I realize you don't know SQUAT about Medicare, but you may want to look at a couple of facts you may find interesting:

Right now, less than 70% of primary care physicians accept Medicare assignment, and that number is dropping every day. Why? Because of the low reimbursement rates and hideous administrative issues. Do you really expect a doctor to be able to keep their doors open when they have to accept 30% to 50% of their regular fees, without any help with their costs of doing business?

The doctors who DO accept Medicare have to "budget" a portion of their practice for Medicare because of the above-stated reimbursements, which is why (a) so many people lose their doc when they reach Medicare age, and (b) it can be so hard to find a doc when you reach 65.

And now you want to pile several million more into the system all at one time without a massive increase in doctors? What, are you going to FORCE docs to accept Medicare for all these new people? That's a bright idea, that should work great.

And by the way, I know for a fact how many of you think that, because someone has Medicare, that they have great coverage. I'll bet you didn't know that Medicare has large deductibles and co-insurance liabilities. It has no out-of-pocket maximums. This is why Medicare Advantage and Medicare Supplements are criticial, but the Democrats are in the process of regulating and squeezing the insurance companies out of existence. Did you know that?

And I haven't MENTIONED the fact that Medicare is BROKE.

This is what you get when you let a bunch of professional politicians "fix" things.

...

 

[Dave020]

According to Lieberman yesterday, the Medicare expansion idea may be DOA in the Senate.

From NAHUNews today:

Media coverage of the Sunday talk shows note Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) faces a difficult task in cobbling together a 60-vote majority to advance the healthcare legislation. The newest challenge came as Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) announced he would not support a compromise Medicare buy-in provision, which several media reports suggested contradicted Lieberman's commitment to Senate leaders during the previous week.

The Washington Post (12/14, Murray) reports that the "next 48 hours will be critical to the fate of healthcare reform in the Senate, as Democratic leaders struggle to settle disputes that stand in the way of holding a final vote this year on the massive package." By mid-week, Senate Majority Leader Reid "must begin the process of ending debate on the $848 billion bill or risk missing his deadline of final passage by Christmas, pushing the contentious healthcare debate into early 2010." Most of the "undecided lawmakers have refused to commit until the Congressional Budget Office delivers a cost analysis on the coverage alternatives offered last week by a group of five liberal and five conservative Democrats to replace the government insurance option originally included in the legislation."

(12/14, Woodward) reports that Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), "whose vote is critical to the bill's prospects, threatened Sunday to join Republicans in opposing healthcare legislation if it permits uninsured individuals as young to 55 to purchase Medicare coverage." The Senator "expressed his opposition twice during the day: first in an interview with CBS, and more strongly later, according to Democratic officials, in a private meeting with" Majority Leader Reid. Democratic aides, "speaking on condition of anonymity, said Lieberman later told Reid he would support a Republican-led filibuster against the bill if it contained the Medicare provision or permitted the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies."

(12/14, A21, Pear, Herszenhorn) reports Lieberman's statement was a "surprise setback for Democratic leaders," and "supporters had said earlier that they thought they had secured Mr. Lieberman's agreement to go along with a compromise they worked out to overcome an impasse within the Democratic Party." Senate Democratic leaders, "including Mr. Reid and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, said they had been mindful of Mr. Lieberman's concerns in the last 10 days and were surprised when he assailed major provisions of the bill on television Sunday." A Senate Democratic aide, "perplexed by Mr. Lieberman's stance, said, 'It was a total flip-flop, and leaves us in a predicament as to what to do.'"

(12/14, A3, Williamson, Hitt, subscription required) reports that in addition to Lieberman, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) also expressed concerns about the Medicare buy-in proposal, noting that he called it "the forerunner of single-payer, the ultimate single-payer plan, maybe even more directly than the public option."

 

[ins.dave]

According to Lieberman yesterday, the Medicare expansion idea may be DOA in the Senate.

From NAHUNews today:

Media coverage of the Sunday talk shows note Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) faces a difficult task in cobbling together a 60-vote majority to advance the healthcare legislation. The newest challenge came as Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) announced he would not support a compromise Medicare buy-in provision, which several media reports suggested contradicted Lieberman's commitment to Senate leaders during the previous week.

The Washington Post (12/14, Murray) reports that the "next 48 hours will be critical to the fate of healthcare reform in the Senate, as Democratic leaders struggle to settle disputes that stand in the way of holding a final vote this year on the massive package." By mid-week, Senate Majority Leader Reid "must begin the process of ending debate on the $848 billion bill or risk missing his deadline of final passage by Christmas, pushing the contentious healthcare debate into early 2010." Most of the "undecided lawmakers have refused to commit until the Congressional Budget Office delivers a cost analysis on the coverage alternatives offered last week by a group of five liberal and five conservative Democrats to replace the government insurance option originally included in the legislation."

(12/14, Woodward) reports that Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), "whose vote is critical to the bill's prospects, threatened Sunday to join Republicans in opposing healthcare legislation if it permits uninsured individuals as young to 55 to purchase Medicare coverage." The Senator "expressed his opposition twice during the day: first in an interview with CBS, and more strongly later, according to Democratic officials, in a private meeting with" Majority Leader Reid. Democratic aides, "speaking on condition of anonymity, said Lieberman later told Reid he would support a Republican-led filibuster against the bill if it contained the Medicare provision or permitted the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies."

(12/14, A21, Pear, Herszenhorn) reports Lieberman's statement was a "surprise setback for Democratic leaders," and "supporters had said earlier that they thought they had secured Mr. Lieberman's agreement to go along with a compromise they worked out to overcome an impasse within the Democratic Party." Senate Democratic leaders, "including Mr. Reid and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, said they had been mindful of Mr. Lieberman's concerns in the last 10 days and were surprised when he assailed major provisions of the bill on television Sunday." A Senate Democratic aide, "perplexed by Mr. Lieberman's stance, said, 'It was a total flip-flop, and leaves us in a predicament as to what to do.'"

(12/14, A3, Williamson, Hitt, subscription required) reports that in addition to Lieberman, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) also expressed concerns about the Medicare buy-in proposal, noting that he called it "the forerunner of single-payer, the ultimate single-payer plan, maybe even more directly than the public option."

Read this earlier online.
Way to go Lieb!

Awesome. Just in time for the holiday's.
I'm getting into the spirit. And I am not, for once, referring to whisky.

 

[Winter_123]

According to Lieberman yesterday, the Medicare expansion idea may be DOA in the Senate.

."

Note that both Collins and Snowe have said that they will vote against both medicare and medicaid expansion.

Harry how is that working out for you after you scorned Olympia back in November?

 

[stormtracker]

This whole health care reform (or whatever they are calling it this week) has rolled over and is in the "graveyard spin." Is Hillary smiling smugly, somewhere at 32,000 feet, knowing full-well this was going to be the outcome?

 

[Mac1958]

As dicey as things look right now for Obamacare, I find it hard to believe that they're going to let this fail altogether. There's far too much at stake politically.

They're gonna throw something together, approve it, declare political victory, and hope that the electorate believes it. I wouldn't be surprised to see their approvals go up a bit in the short term, then we'll see.

...

 

[Winter_123]

As dicey as things look right now for Obamacare, I find it hard to believe that they're going to let this fail altogether. There's far too much at stake politically.

They're gonna throw something together, approve it, declare political victory, and hope that the electorate believes it. I wouldn't be surprised to see their approvals go up a bit in the short term, then we'll see.

...

Oh the dems will get a lot even if major elements of these various bills fall out along the way. If you are a socialist you dont worry about the details you just want to establish that the federal government is now responsible for health care in this country. Then as surely as night follows day there will be bills and amendments to come year after year to expand it.

Even if we end out without a public option or single payer, which we will in round one, the libs have established that the feds are responsible for seeing that there a health care system in this country now. Whereas, before it was left up to the states or the private market except for entitlement programs. One can argue against this by saying that the feds are not responsible because private carriers will still function. However they function only by permission of the federal government now, not by constitutional right and both the libs and conservatives now expect the feds to intervene and come up with something different if there are deficiencies in the private market. Yeh, I know there are some conservatives somewhere who do not believe this but they have not been able to get it together so they dont matter much. The republicans in general and the moderates in both parties now believe for the most part that the feds have a responsibility to put together a health system in this country. Much like Medicare Advantage, it still be considered the responsibility of the feds even if private carriers are involved. That change is huge.

It is the same in lots of other areas now. That bonus you were expecting at the corporation? You will get one if the feds allow it, or it might be capped if they dont like it. That private contract you had as bondholder with GM? That only exists by permission of the federal government now, not as a matter of legal right. The feds might just decide to eliminate it tomorrow.

Everything in health care exists by permission of the federal government now and people will go to the federal government now with their hopes and grievances. That is the big gain the dems have achieved and is irreversable. You elect Hillary or Obama and that is what you get. That is what they campaigned on.

Having said that, it is also true that in the short run the dems have one piss-poor watered down reform bill flopping around out on the Senate floor like a roadkill. It will not stop the inevitable encroachment and expansion of the feds month after month, year after year but it is sort of a pitiful start rather than a steamroller. I don't know who is howling louder right now the conservatives or the libs.

 

[ins.dave]

It will not stop the inevitable encroachment and expansion of the feds month after month, year after year but it is sort of a pitiful start rather than a steamroller. I don't know who is howling louder right now the conservatives or the libs.

WTF!?!, Wintafresh, you can be a real buzz kill bubba. After months of this tedious torture, let us watch 3962 C.T.D?
Let me enjoy the fact that these dogs are at the end of their day with this issue?
I hope to Ch*st people wake up and realize that free markets and not govt. are what made America great and will make it great again. Half already know it the other are stupid.
Yeah, you're right. The god d*mn govt. bailout / involvement was the worst sh*t ever because now they have the right to cap exec. comp at 500,000 ... tax and regulate ... just like they want to do with cap and trade and the f*ck'n carbon tax, ect. Whatever they can do to expand govt. and put us in a box ... thats what they wanna do. These socialist pr*cks need to be stopped.
This bill is done Winter. You know it. So what are you enferring? Your precious pubs are on about a govt. healthcare take over also? I'm not hearing that. We need Ron Paul sailing this ship.


Ron Paul 2012 - Champion of the constitution - time to defederalize.

 

[Winter_123]

WTF!?!, These pr*cks need to be stopped.
This bill is done Winter. You know it. So what are you enferring? .

I thought I laid it out. The bill is following the predictable track where the dems will get something but not as much as they want. However, you and others sometimes think of health reform as an "event" or as if this is a constitutional amendment where we see what happens and then go off and work with it for the next ten years. Big mistake. There is nothing going on here that cannot be amended or a new bill introduced any month of the year. All the dems and the socialists need to do is to establish in the minds of the public that the feds are responsible for health care in this country. They have succeeded in doing that. The argument is not about "whether" now. It has shifted to "how." Even if the "how" turns out to be more conservative than the libs want that does not change the fact that that major shift has occurred. Health reform now is just a big Christmas tree that sits in Congress now and you keep adding trinkets to it year after year. It is not out in the states or the private sector anymore unless one of the trinkets on the tree says it can be.

There is about as much chance now that the feds will get out of health care reform whatever as there is that the feds will give medicare back to the private market or states. Not going to happen. As discussed even as in instances (such as medicare advantage) where some conservative or private sector impulses prevail it is still by oversight and permission of the federal government. Carriers are not performing as desired? Feds will just tell them how it is going to be. Might even take them over. We have a socialist government now. Once you have established socialist powers the particulars of a specific bill at a specific point in time are not all that important. Just add in more time and you get there.

Add nauseam, those who think in six month time horizons are all set and this watered-down bill will certainly ensure that. Six years is another world altogether and health reform is only one piece of the picture. We are a socialist country now.

There is of course always the argument that if bills can be amended that that also means that conservative principles can take over and we can go back to wherever "back" is. Nice in theory. In reality, there is no history in this country of reversing government growth. As Ronald Reagan said: "The closest thing we have to eternal life is a government program."

Change you can believe in.