[My] Life in Wisconsin

Key Provisions of the Senate Health Care Reform Bill


The "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,"
H.R. 3590

By , About.com Guide


First of all, here is the bill which is now before your senators.
2074 pages, all are double spaced. Easy.

This article summarizes key provisions in the U.S. Senate health care bill, "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," H.R. 3590, which was unveiled by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on November 18, 2009 after the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that the bill:

    * would reduce the federal deficit by $130 billion over the 2010-2019 period;
    * would cover about 31 million Americans who are presently uninsured;
    * would raise the percentage of Americans with health care coverage from 83% to 94%;
    * would slow the annual growth rate of Medicare to 6% from its 8% growth rate since 1990.


The Senate's "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" is the companion legislation to the House health care reform bill, which was hotly debated and negotiated over many months, and passed on November 7, 2009 in a historic House 220 to 215 vote.

Health care coverage and reform measures under the Senate plan are similar to the House health care reform bill.

However, most fiscal aspects of the Senate health care reform plan differ considerably from the House plan, including in funding sources for reform legislation, decreased employer penalties for not offering health insurance to employees, and decreased taxpayer penalties for not obtaining mandated coverage.


Health Care Coverage
Like the House bill, a Medicare-like public plan will offer four levels of care to all U.S. citizens and legal residents to choose from, without regard to pre-existing medical conditions: basic, enhanced, premium and premium-plus. The four government plan levels are differentiated mainly by costs covered by the public plan, rather than the participant, and range from 60% to 90% of costs.

Under the Senate bill, states may opt-out of allowing the public plan to be provided to their residents. Illegal immigrants are not covered by either the Senate or House health care refrom bill.

The public plan will be offered along with a myriad of private plans via a state-based insurance exchange.
For the first few years, only small businesses, the uninsured, and self-employed persons may purchase policies from the exchange.

In contrast to the House bill, employers will be strongly encouraged, but not required, to provide health insurance coverage for employees. If coverage is not provided, businesses will be assessed a flat fee per employee who buys insurance via the exchange.

Like the House bill, the Senate bill reforms for-profit practices by mandating that private insurers:
    * are required to accept all applicants,
    * may not charge higher premiums because a person becomes ill,
    * prohibits the use of pre-existing conditions to limit or disallow coverage, and
    * children may remain on parents' insurance through age 26.
    * No lifetime caps on coverage expenditures.


Mandatory Insurance with Cost Subsidies
As is the case for car insurance in most states, all Americans will be required to obtain some form of health-care insurance coverage.

Subsidies to help pay for the costs of government plans will be given on a sliding scale to individuals and families with annual incomes between 133% to 400% of poverty level.
* Those earning less than 133% are eligible for Medicaid coverage.

Penalties of up to $750 per adult, under the Senate plan, would be assessed for failure to purchase insurance coverage. The House plan charges much higher penalties, as high as 2.5% of annual income.


Doctors and Hospitals
Under the Senate's public option plan, doctors, hospitals and other medical professionals will be reimbursed at individually or regionally negotiated rates.... a change forced by legislators who hail from largely rural areas, which often receive below-cost rates under standardized Medicare reimbursement procedures.

It's widely expected that all doctors and hospitals that currently provide Medicare services will also opt to provide "public option" healthcare plan services.


Paying for Government "Public Option" Plan
The goal for the Obama administration and Democratic leadership in Congress is for government "public option" health care to be budget-neutral, which means new government funds will be found (new revenues or cost-cutting measures) to pay for the new Medicare-like plan.

The Senate Democrats' "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" legislation plans to pay for these new initiatives through the following:
    * A 40% tax on employer-provided "cadillac plans," which are defined as having employer-paid annual premiums over $23,000 for families and $8,500 for individuals
    * Increased Medicare payroll tax, from 1.45% to 1.95%, on couples with adjusted gross incomes over $250,000 and individuals over $200,000
    * A 5% tax on elective cosmetic surgeries
    * Annual levies on health insurers, clinical laboratories, and pharmaceutical companies.
______________

So there you have it once again...
I imagine the rabble rousers will have their field days posting ignorant and false things pertaining to this...
Oh well.
Some people just refuse to educate themselves.
It will be their burden later on to explain their own culpability, (as they will, at some point), watch their loved ones die.


XOXO
Me

***  New "Flintville" update later today...


On a related note... From here: http://www.figtreenotes.com

What the American public still has not really understood is that the economic morass we are in is directly connected to our profligate military spending. While people bemoan a health care package costing $849 billion while cutting $1 trillion over a decade in projected health costs, they fail to acknowledge that we have spent about a trillion dollars on the Iraq War. And now we are on the brink of sending more troops to Afghanistan with the price tag of $1 million a year per soldier. The overall military budget could jump to $734 billion — 10 percent more than the $667 billion under the Bush administration.

In the Leonard Bernstein “Mass,” a street band and chorus do a rollicking riff on the Gloria: Half of the people are stoned and the other half are waiting for the next election. Half the people are drowned and the other half are swimming in the wrong direction. And they call it glorious living. Prophetic words from maestro Bernstein. Folks are already polling Obama’s popularity and the wing nuts on the right are ready to torpedo him as a failure if he doesn’t send troops overseas. They can’t wait for the next election.

Garry Wills, in the November 5 New Your Review of Books, still has high hopes for Obama’s promise to “change the way Washington works” and would like to see him enter a second term. “But I would rather see him a one term president,” says Wills, “than have him pass on another unwinnable war to the person who follows him.”

I like that, and I like his conclusion: “It is unlikely that we will soon have another president with the moral and rhetorical force to take us out of a foolish commitment that cannot be sustained without shame and defeat. If it costs him his presidency, what other achievement can match it?”

Well spoken, Garry

9 comments:

  1. You have to know that if there is over 500 billion a year in medicare fraud the government runs it. And if it slows down the rate of people on medicare that would mean that many less people would be alive to ask for it. They plan on taking away Medicare advantage which is a supplemental insurance for seniors. There are not lies these are on their list of things to do. I keep saying just do what some states are doing . For instance Minnesota already has 93% of their citizens insured without taking away from old people.There is a right way and a wrong way to reform health care. Buying health insurance across state lines would lower the cost , make it competitive. Funny how they mention car insurance, which you can buy across state lines. I wonder if there is any pork in it besides the new Louisiana purchase. I do not understand why if a person is against the mess the house and now the senate is making out of health care and would rather see a smaller version , and maybe have it done in stages.it means that these same people are against reform.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some pretty big "ifs" there, Sweetie. And a lot of speculation too.
    I only posted the facts for everyone.

    Remember too that the supplemental Medicare Advantage is run wholly by Health Insurers, not the govt.

    XOXO
    Me

    ReplyDelete
  3. From here: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

    Additionally...

    Sen. Mary Landrieu's state of Louisiana is still ailing years after Hurricane Katrina devastated its largest city. So Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could be killing two birds with one stone by including in his health care bill $100 million in federal Medicaid aid for any states (aka, Louisiana) that have suffered a natural disaster in the last seven years. That's much needed help for the poor in Louisiana, and also a sweetener for Landrieu, whose support for health care reform has never been terribly certain.

    That appears to be a more justifiable offer from Reid than a separate concession to Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), another health-care fence sitter. In a move that appears designed to win Nelson's initial procedural votes, Reid decided not to include a measure ending anti-trust exemptions for the insurance industry.

    Reid originally fought hard to lift the exemption, even testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the need to end insurance companies' monopolistic practices. But his decision may be paying political dividends, as Nelson inches toward supporting a key health care test vote on Saturday.

    The only remaining question: What's in it for Arkansas?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Mommy!

    Glad to see that you are still sticking ONLY with the FACTS... Something that many people just aren't getting through their heads... People also have to look beyond THEMSELVES and realize that this bill will save more people than hurt them...

    That Medicare Advantage is a lot of "extras" like the fact that some insurances are putting money up so that people can join a gym... I'm sorry, but that's not necessary or they would be in physical therapy if it was. You can get a lot of exercise on your own without paying to go to a gym... A lot of Medicare participants were interviewed about this fact and said that they definitely don't mind giving up things like that so that uninsured Americans can get health coverage that could save their lives...

    I believe this falls under, "a SMALL price to pay..."

    Love you MUCH MUCH!
    ~CaseyAnne

    ReplyDelete
  5. I still keep hoping that someday (at least before I become eligible for Medicare in 12 years!) that I will be able to have a full benefit health insurance policy for myself. Right now I have a ditsy little "Mini-Med" plan, from the grocery store where I work part time, that doesn't cover squat. My only fear, because my income is only slightly higher than what would qualify for Medicaid, is that I still won't be able to afford it. And because I wouldn't want to be fined, I'd end up having to pay for health insurance but would then have to adjust my living accommodations (move to a cheaper house or an apartment.) I think a lot of people would sleep better if they would start giving out approximate figures as to what it's going to cost the uninsured to become insured. Don't get me wrong, I am in favor of this, but it is still making me a little nervous.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am happy that you appreciate the effort that takes, just to "find" the damned facts about it all.
    I try anyway...

    I would give up snow shoveling? hehehe

    XOXO
    me

    ReplyDelete

  7. I can only imagine how frustrating this is for you.
    I have seen what you are looking for...
    Will try to find it again... Hang in there with me please.

    XOXO
    Me

    ReplyDelete