This weekend the Senate will vote to begin debate on its health reform bill -- needing 60 votes just to begin talking about the issue on the floor and allowing amendments.

As it stands now, the Senate bill would cover 94 percent of Americans, and is projected by the independent Congressional Budget Office to cut the deficit by more than $130 billion over the next decade. Check out this brief side-by-side from the NY Times of the Senate bill's major differences from the House bill. And for the full text of the bill, click here.

We can expect to hear alot in the debate about the public insurance option. We've taken a hard look at this proposal, as well as "co-ops," and have examined what both will mean to consumers. Make sure you check out our analyses here, and learn what the public option actually would mean to you.

The upshot of our examination: "The bottom line is that the larger size of the public plan option may make it the only option that provides the market “clout” needed to operate as a strong competitor that could help hold down premium costs and inspire private insurers to expand their consumer focus."

comments (6)

Please refrain from advocating legislation of any kind. But if you must advocate, you should at least try to understand the probable results of what you advocate. The new federal health care "reform" will do nothing to contain cost of medical goods and services. The only thing that stands a chance of reducing costs is direct consumer input by means of choosing less expensive items over more expensive items. The current legislation does nothing but remove, even further, the current input of the consumer.

Phil,
I sell Health Insurance and I want you to explain just exactly how this removes consumer input?
A Public OPTION is just that...an OPTION or opportunity,a choice made by the CONSUMER which they do not have now.
This current system has no input from Consumers especially those denied or canceled when their medical loss ratio goes to high.
The unemployed have an option called COBRA which allows the unemployed to continue their coverage at roughly 2 times the cost that they and their employer were paying which is almost impossible for the average worker who I think probably made more working than on unemployment compensation..
WOW what a choice !
I see the faces of those who are denied or priced so high that they cannot afford it.
We have to start somewhere and prior administrations have done nothing to address the problem and those that have attempted it have been attacked by those politicians receiving huge donations by big insurance.
If reform is passed without a real public option then yes we will see rates skyrocket which is really going to make big insurance more money and give me more customers to write BUT Is that the right way to go ...NO!
Health Insurance is a necessity not a luxury and price gouging must stop.
We scream when it costs to much for a tank of gas and want Government to stop it which is price control so Phil what is the difference?...Human Lives,Families going bankrupt,dying as a result of discovering cancer and other illnesses to late.
Price gouging and monopolies like United healthcare and Aetna are simply interested in only one thing..higher dividends and larger incomes for themselves.
Free enterprise is great but it does not mean they are free to screw the American people.

This entire Health Care debate is a total non starter as it has nothing to do with "health nor care" and everything to do with securing long lasting power and control by the very radical leftists, marxists now in power.

Yes, their real goal is much more nefarious -securing more control/power via dependency by turning the middle class into part of the entitlement welfare class. Clearly, nothing in the US Constitution allows Congress to even consider legislation of this nature. Yet sadly, this radical Congress seems willing to force it's citizens to give up their liberty & Free Will with a false promise of "health security" BUT in the end US Citizens will end up with neither free will, liberty, nor any security.

No Fed Govt program has ever worked effectively, nor ever controlled costs, and so if this latest 2000+ page abonimation ever passes there will be long lines, severe rationing, quality care will plummet & costs will skyrocket out of sight.

Then Budget realities will force the Fed Govt to institute severe cost containment health "guidelines/mandates" in the name of the "greater good" - will initially target "bad" behaviors (eating/obesity, drinking, smoking etc.) but it won't stop there.

Rationally think about it: these so-called behavior "guidelines/mandates" would be very similar to having an "electronic monitoring device" (think criminal justice ankle braclet) strapped to one's body pipelined into a monolithic Federal Govt Bureaucracy giving them the potential / power for control over all aspects of one's everyday life.
Net result will be that an individual's natural, Constitutionally guaranteed, God given FREE WILL would be subjugated to a faceless Fed govt entity and that's akin to SLAVERY!

Want real health care reform? It's very simple = Tort Reform, give individuals/families tax breaks/credits for HSA & MSAs, allow health insurers to sell across state lines & allow for portability of policies.

To borrow from "Ask Amy" (Washington Post, Nov 30, Style Section)

In what areas do we agree?

Is there anything in the Health Care Bill you approve of?

Has anyone ever told you that you converted him or her to your point of view?

Have you ever changed your mind due to something someone else said?

You should not be involved in advocating a health care bill that will cost more and provide less....except debt for generations. Listen to the American people. 51% of us do not trust this bill. I am shocked that an organization that I respected is advocating for a bill that will hurt us all.

The bills headed for conference expend access to healthcare (a good thing), but are a drop in the bucket at controlling escalating costs (a bad thing). Passing these bills would be committing ourselves to unsustainable spending. We have to address both 'expanded access' and 'cost control' at the same time.

The Kaiser Family Foundation reports that between 1999 and 2008, the cumulative growth in U.S. health insurance premiums was 119%, compared with cumulative inflation of 29%.
Here’s an analogy. Passing healthcare reform as it’s currently presented is like buying a house with an adjustable rate mortgage where your payment is going to go up about 10% a year, but your salary is only going to rise 3% per year. Assume in 2010, you earn $3,000 per month and your mortgage is $1,000. In 10 years, your earnings would be up to $4,032 per month and your mortgage would be $2,594. You started out with your mortgage consuming 33% of your income. In 10 years, it consumes 64% of your income. Get the picture? It’s not a sustainable model. It's extremely irresponsible!

Post a Comment (* indicates a required field)

*Name:

*Email Address:

URL:

*Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

*Security Code:

<<< You must enter this security code!

Remember Me? Yes No