Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ezra Klein: Olympia Snowe's Amendments

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:47 PM
Original message
Ezra Klein: Olympia Snowe's Amendments
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/olympia_snowes_amendments.html


Olympia Snowe's Amendments
Ezra Klein


It's becoming pretty common for Hill and administration sources to tell me that "Olympia Snowe is more of a Democrat than some of the Democrats." What they mean by that is that she's pushing for a level of affordability and subsidies and consumer protections that far surpass what the Democratic swing votes are interested in. But is it true?

Here's a full summary of the amendments Snowe has offered. Her unique role in the debate means they're pretty likely to be adopted, and their adoption could potentially win her over to the bill. But are they any good?

After reading every one, I have to say: they're almost all worthy changes to the bill. Snowe vastly strengthens the exchanges, which is a huge deal. She expands subsidies to more people, sets limits on high deductible plans, and weakens the penalty in the individual mandate. If I'd read this list of amendments without an attached author, I would indeed have thought they came from a moderate, though not particularly conservative, Democrat.


Coverage:

1) The public plan "trigger," which I detailed here:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/olympia_snowes_trigger_amendme.html

2) The current bill doesn't allow an employee who is offered insurance to seek help and tax credits on the exchange unless the employer's insurance would cost more than 13 percent of their income. Snowe's amendment "modifies the affordability test for granting access to subsidized Exchange coverage, scaling the criteria from 3 percent at 133 percent of poverty to 13 percent at 300 percent of poverty." Good!

3) The current bill allows small businesses with up to 50 employees to enter the exchange, and states can raise that to small businesses with up to 100 employees if they wish. Snowe's amendment makes this 100 employees from the outset. Good!

4) The current bill tells states to expand Medicaid to 133 percent of poverty in 2014. Snowe's amendment would allow them to expand to 100 percent of poverty in 2014, and "then phase in Medicaid eligibility to 133 percent of poverty more gradually." Seems bad, though potentially responsive to implementation issues I'm unaware of.

5) The current bill directs states to maintain their current Medicaid eligibility standards until the exchange starts up in 2013. Snowe's amendment would only direct that they maintain their eligibility standards up to 133 percent of poverty -- states that cover above that could drop their coverage. Bad!

6) The current bill doesn't set a maximum deductible for employer-based coverage above what the health savings account rules allow. Since those rules permit out-of-pocket spending of $5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for families, the deductibles could be incredibly high. Snowe's amendment "require{s} that an employer offering coverage shall not provide a plan with a deductible which exceeds $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families, unless offering contributions which offset any increase in deductible above these limits." Extremely good!

7) The current bill phases the small group market's insurance regulations into place over five years -- beginning, if I remember correctly, in 2013. This amendment accelerates that timetable so "all rating reforms are in place no later than January 1, 2014." Good!

8) The current bill directs the states to create five-year plans for including large employers in the exchange in 2017. This amendment would allow them to enter the exchange in 2013. This is a very good, totally awesome, hugely important amendment. It effectively opens the exchanges to all employers from the get-go.

9) "This amendment would allow Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs), a resource partner of the Small Business Administration, to participate in the competitive grant program." Seems fine.

10) This amendment ensures that small businesses that grow bigger can remain in the exchange. Imagine a 47-person business has been getting health insurance from the exchange, but they become a 107-person business. If this amendment is passed, they get to keep their current coverage. Good!

11) This amendments would require plans in the exchange to cover early periodic screening, diagnosis and treatment, which is very important for kids. Good!

12) This amendment allows states to access increased Medicaid funding for enrolling people who are currently eligible but simply unenrolled. Good!

Financing:

1) Snowe partnered with John Kerry and Maria Cantwell on this amendment to soften the excise tax: It would make sure the cap grows a little bit faster so it doesn't begin to tax average policies (at least not as quickly), and it permanently raises the cap for individuals and families between 55 and 65 years of age. Good!

2) A revision to adjustments to payment updates that I'm not qualified to evaluate.

3) Allow people to put more money in their tax-free flexible spending accounts. Good!

4) This amendment reduces the penalty on the individual mandates, though it doesn't say by how much. I'm coming to the view that that's good, though I wouldn't drop it too far down.

5) This amendment would eliminate the individual mandate penalty, and replace it with something called a "defined minimum contribution," which would also ensure access to limited health services. This seems like a potentially good idea, at least from a political perspective. Penalties don't poll well. The devil, however, will be in the details, and right now there aren't any.

6) Directs Medicaid to extend the "prompt pay" rules -- which directs Medicaid to pay claims very quickly -- to hospitals and nursing homes.

7) "The amendment would allow small business owners to be considered as employees in order to enable them to participate in a cafeteria plan." Seems fine.

8) "This amendment would state that it is the Sense of the Senate that the Senate should not waive the Senate Pay-As-You-Go point of order and the Senate point of order against long-term deficits when considering future legislation that would amend a final bill." In other words, it's this Senate politely asking future Senates not to bust the budget when amending the bill. It's not, however, binding in any way.

9) Protects HIPPA-excluded insurance plans from the excise tax. I don't know much about those plans.

Delivery System:

1) "Establishes a three-year, $75 million demonstration project that would allow Medicaid funding to be directed to non-publicly owned and operated psychiatric hospitals for Medicaid beneficiaries between the ages of 21-64 who require stabilization in these settings as required by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act."

2) "Directs CMS to develop national standards regarding air ambulances to ensure quality patient care delivery and safety of the aircraft."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Very interesting policy piece. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Seems like she's making an effort; that's a good thing imo. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes. I'd trade her for Baucus and no player to be named later in a heartbeat. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. Oops! Here's a recommendation!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. I Personally Find Olympia Snowe Preferrable To Some Of Our Consevadems
I would like to hear the argument that Ben Nelson is much more liberal than Olympia Snowe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
6. This is encouraging. Kudos to Ms. Snowe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC