Monday, October 12, 2009

PricewaterhouseCoopers' report on Baucus proposal = ALARM BELLS!!!

I know this debate has been raging for a fair while now, but if I remember correctly, at the onset of it all President Obama specified three simple criteria that need be met to receive his signature: increase access and affordability; decrease the cost curve over the long-run; and must be budget neutral. We've already gone through the motions with the public option and the CBO has made it crystal clear it misses the mark on two and a half of the three (not budget neutral, bends cost-curve up, increases access but makes private coverage less affordable....).

It has been readily said that the Baucus proposal is a step in the right direction, but still falls far short of those simple yet imperative benchmarks. The CBO tenuously projects it will reduce the deficit by $81 billion over the next decade. That's under the assumption that they are able to implement and maintain the "Permanent reductions in the annual updates to Medicare’s payment rates for most services in the fee-for-service sector (other than physicians’ services), yielding budgetary savings of $162 billion over 10 years" that would grossly inflate the cost of private insurance as providers charge them more for the services they provide below cost to Medicare recipients- who are conveniently expected to grossly increase over the next decade as the baby boomer generation retires. Hmmmm. The budget neutral quality of the proposal is on very shaky ground. Maybe this can be cleared up when there is actual legislation to accompany. 

Then there's access and affordability. It accomplishes this through a new insurance exchange and subsidies for families making up to 400 percent of the federal poverty line. The exchanges guarantee access, the subsidies guarantee affordability. Simple enough. It accomplishes this, but with an obvious cost. 

According to the report released earlier today by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the bill will actually bend the cost curve up for individuals, families and businesses. I'm assuming that fact will be somewhat effaced by the concurrent subsidies. Check out the report here. This is a fat lot of information to digest at once. Check it out. Let me know what you think.

1 comment:

  1. Greetings,

    My name is Barbara O’ Brien and my blogging at The Mahablog, Crooks and Liars, AlterNet, and elsewhere on the progressive political and health blogophere has earned me the notoriety of being a panelist at the Yearly Kos Convention and a featured guest blogger at the Take Back America Conference in Washington, DC.

    I’m contacting you because I found your site in a health reform blog search and want to tell you about my newest blogging platform —the public concern of health care and its reform. Our shared concerns include health reform, tort reform, public health, safe workplaces, and asbestos contamination.

    If you’re confused by the nation’s debate over health care reform, you are not alone. While nearly everyone agrees our health care system is in trouble, the nation is nearly at war with itself over what to do about it. Some say the entire system needs to be overhauled. Others urge caution, pointing to the costs of reform and warning of high taxes and “big government.”

    To increase awareness on these important issues, my goal is to get a resource link on your site or even allow me to provide a guest posting. Please contact me back, I hope to hear from you soon. Drop by our site www.maacenter.org in the meantime.

    Thanks,

    Barbara O’ Brien
    barbaraobrien@maacenter.org

    ReplyDelete