A recent joint report from the Congressional budget office and the Joint Committee on Taxation dated 7/2/09 noted that the proposed new bills would only cover an additional 20 million of the 65 million that are either uninsured or lack adequate basic insurance.
This would be at the expense of a national deficit increase of $591 billion from 2010 to 2019. That is after measures to reduce the costs by over $100 million are in place. This is giving some of the Washington hierarchy reason to pause for a second look.
That is one of the factors that may delay any bill from being completed before the August recess.
To return to the present two versions; in the matter of the Insurance Market Place; the Senate would require every state to have an insurance exchange where small employers and individuals uninsured through work or a public program could buy insurance. The Senate bill would also allow states to form regional insurance exchanges.
The House bill is more federally centered by creating a national insurance exchange for the same purpose. It could be open to large employers over a period of time. It would also allow states to opt out and operate their own exchange under federal rules.
It is obvious that the Senate is still concerned with state’s rights and the House is leaning to a national health plan.
In the area of a Public Plan; the Senate would offer a new public plan to compete with the private insurers in the insurance exchange. This public plan would only provide the essential health benefits an is described in their bill.
It is obvious that from all elements of the Health Care industry that serve patients there has been considerable opposition to this plan. Physicians, Home care, Rehab services and especially the Hospitals would suffer economically. We have personally felt the results of reduced cash flow to hospitals. Even if they could stay open, it would be at the expense of reduced care and services.
No comments:
Post a Comment