House GOPer: Senate 'Keep Your Health Plan' Bill Might Be Better Than Ours

[flpoljunkie]

Source: Talkingpointsmemo Livewire

House GOPer: Senate 'Keep Your Health Plan' Bill Might Be Better Than Ours

DYLAN SCOTT – NOVEMBER 13, 2013, 1:35 PM EST604

Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), who introduced the House bill expected to come up for vote Friday which would allow people to keep their existing health plans, said Wednesday that a similar bill introduced by Senate Democrats might actually be better than his.

As TPM has reported, the Upton bill would amend the Affordable Care Act to allow insurers to continue offering their existing individual health insurance plans through 2014. The Senate bill, introduced by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), would require them to -- and allow people to stay on those non-ACA-compliant plans indefinitely.

“Let’s challenge them to pass [Landrieu’s bill] in the Senate, and if so, I think that’s even a bigger and perhaps better step than what we have in the House,” Upton told the Washington Examiner. “Let’s see if she can pass that.”

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/landrieu-upton-obamacare-health-insurance

---

'Better' for destroying any success for the Affordable Care Act. Craven Democrats!

[Mass]

1. Surprisingly, as I understand both plans, Upton is correct.

The house plan does not solve the problem but extends it.

The Senate plan forces companies to reissue cancelled plans if the customer wants it while informing the customer of how the plan is substandard.

I think it is not great either, but it is simply better. I am just surprised Upton would understand that.

Frankly, if the GOP decides to substitute the Senate plan to them, they may get quite a few Democrats to vote for it. I doubt they will, but who knows.

[Dawson Leery]

2. Redstate does NOT want the Landrieu plan

as it will ensure her re-election.

[geek tragedy]

3. It is better, actually, as it (a) binds the insurance companies rather than granting

them a call option on their policies. It also puts all discretion in the hands of the consumer, and requires extensive disclosure to the consumer.

It also makes certain that as individuals leave the individual marketplace, so do their policies--those policies can't be renewed or offered to new suckers.

[JoePhilly]

11. I keep waiting for folks to think through the elements you mention.

I can't see the insurance companies wanting to do this.

The current situation gives them total control and the ability to trick people into a bad up sell.

This bill would trap the insurers. They'd have to maintain plans that have dwindling enrollment. But those plans require volume to really work. You trick lots of folks into giving you small amounts. Then you rare pay anything. You make a ton. But if you only have a few folks, anytime you pay out, the margin is much smaller.

[geek tragedy]

13. They wouldn't have to maintain the plans--they could just leave the individual market in the

state entirely, which would then be a termination of the plan for anyone left in the state.

So, they couldn't blame ACA requirements for the cancellation--it would be a business decision of an insurance company.

Individual market is not stable--depends on fresh influx of new enrolleees. Cut off the supply, the individual market plans will die on the vine.

[Swede Atlanta]

4. Wrong, wrong, wrong.......

This is fascism!!!!

You don't base the healthcare system (outside of the VA and Medicare/Medicaid) on PRIVATE insurers and then require the insurers to keep the plans indefinitely.

What exactly does that mean "keep them indefinitely"? Does that mean the coverage provisions including co-pays, exclusions, etc.? Does it mean coverage plus price?

It is unsustainable to force private companies to maintain policies indefinitely especially when the terms are unknown.

It would be better to require them to renew existing policies through 2014 on the same terms and conditions as 2013 and allow these individual market policyholders to find potentially better coverage on the exchanges.

[geek tragedy]

5. This is a very small portion of the marketplace, and is not self-sustaining.

The individual market has a high turnover rate, with most people leaving their policies anyways.

It's not at all unsustainable to tell them to keep the current policies intact. Pretty simple actually.

[Swede Atlanta]

6. Exactly.....

You cannot have a system based on private insurance that limits the amount of money they can use for profits, etc. and then tell them they must keep coverage and prices at a fixed level "indefinitely".

I think Obama made a mistake in not making clear that the ability to keep your policy is subject to the decisions of your insurance provider. He could have stated that the law (assuming this was part of the law) encourages issuers of current policies to support the existing policies for a transition period of say 5 years but that nothing is GUARANTEED.

It is similar to his faux pax on "use of chemical weapons in Syria is a red line". He should have said that "certain actions by either side, such as use of chemical weapons, MAY constitute a red line and the U.S. will respond accordingly.

While he is so professorial, there are times when the precision of his statements are not in fact rooted in reality.

I fully support him but think he needs to correct these types of mis-statements and ensure no other ones come in future.

[geek tragedy]

8. Who said they have to keep prices constant on those individual plans?

Prices go up. And, as the # of enrollees in those programs dwindle, they'll compensate for the increased cost per enrollee by either (a) raising prices or (b) withdrawing from the individual market in that state. Either way, the effect will be pretty much the same as if they were required to end non-compliant policies for everyone.

It's incredibly hard to campaign effectively on something so complex and with so many moving parts. Either the message is just noise, or it gets oversimplified to the point where it becomes misleading in some cases.

[freshwest]

20. It was explained that way in a Bill Maher clip on numbers and the the ACA.

[quadrature]

7. Kabuki theater... the situation can't be reversed

trying to get insurance policies uncanceled.
can't be done, because.

various state laws involved... and...
you are trying to force private companies
to do something they do not want.

[geek tragedy]

9. forcing private companies to do something they do not want?

Oh heavens, that's just intolerable!

[JoePhilly]

12. lol ... maybe some are figuring it out.

I'm feeling more and more sure this plan is a trap for the GOP and the insurers.

[geek tragedy]

14. There's a reason that (a) it's being offered by a red state Democrat

up for re-election; (b) every other red-state Senator up for re-election has jumped on board; and (c) they White House has ducked any questions on it.

(C) is the key to figuring out what's going on. What's the only way something gets passed in both Houses of Congress? Answer: Obama refuses to oppose it (killing it in the Senate) or support it (killing it in the House).

[Dawson Leery]

15. +1

[JoePhilly]

16. The thing is ... I don't think the House would pass the Senate version.

The Senate version locks the insurers into a situation they'd hate. And, it would kill much of the GOP freak out.

And ... as you note, these plans wouldn't last long because people would start dropping them ... to a point (I think) where the insurers would probably lose money on them.

I can't see the House buying into this, unless they don't understand the provisions.

[geek tragedy]

17. That's why Upton's remark is so surprising.

But, make them say why they won't support the Landrieu bill that places all of the obligations on the insurers and all of the benefits on the consumer.

[JoePhilly]

18. Agree.

[Mojorabbit]

19. I read an article today on this board saying the White House opposed it. nt

[Iliyah]

10. Hey, if the 3% - 5% want to keep their health insurance

and whomever with crappy health insurance I say let them. Her plan also lets them know that they have options. ACA will not be affected. It gonna take time to get some glitches out and same happened with SSI and Medicare and of course the GOPers back then tried to stop them as well.