Obama: "(Public Option) would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance."

[Junkdrawer]

Full Paragraph:

...

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.


I can't tell you how many times in the past week I've been told DEFINITELY that everyone could get the Public Option. No, no you can't.

[SharonAnn]

1. SO, if you have insurance (even if it's bad) you have to keep it?

[valerief]

3. For now. nt

[Junkdrawer]

11. Bernie Sanders via Matt Taibb...

...

There's a flip side, though: If your employer offers you acceptable care and you reject it, you are barred from buying insurance in the insurance "exchange." In other words, you must take the insurance offered to you at work. And that might have made sense if, as decreed in the House version, employers actually had to offer good care. But in the Senate version passed by the HELP committee, there is no real requirement for employers to provide any kind of minimal level of care. On the contrary, employers who currently offer sub-par coverage will have their shitty plans protected by a grandfather clause. Which means …

"If you have coverage you like, you can keep it," says Sen. Sanders. "But if you have coverage you don't like, you gotta keep it."

...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong/print

[Juche]

18. And that is a problem

My older brother, at his old job, had terrible insurance in his job. He bought a plan online for his family because of it.

[Junkdrawer]

19. Put everyone that works for WalMart in that boat...

It's a HUGE problem

[abelenkpe2]

27. How does it effect businesses

I know a place who'd love to rid themselves of the overhead attached to providing healthcare. If they dropped insurance for their employees would the employees be able to get the public option. Or would the business be charged?

[Junkdrawer]

32. Big business yes...Small business no...

payrolls below $500,000 = no mandates

[ProSense]

56. That's not true.

You can opt out, nothing changes.

[Junkdrawer]

58. Bernie Sanders...ProSense....

Who to believe?

Really tough call....

[ProSense]

60. What? Did you miss the link to the NYT? n/t

[Junkdrawer]

63. From what I'm reading, if your company has a crap plan, you have four choices:

1.) Quit

2.) Buy the crap plan

3.) Buy on your own outside the Exchange

4.) Pay the fines

[TankLV]

71. Bernie - PS is spewing BS as usual...

[EndElectoral]

65. Exactly, and what's troubling is Rahm and Obama know that.

[geek_sabre]

68. "If you like your insurance plan, good, because you have to keep it"

I'm pretty sure that's what he's been saying all summer... i think...

[liberal N proud]

2. Gets it in the door

[rucky]

64. Was it a dealbreaker before?

[armyowalgreens]

4. Can't you just drop your insurance plan and get on the public option?

[jtrockville]

48. No, not if your employer offers a plan (as far as I can tell).

[ipaint]

5. The devil is in the details.

Sounds like the 10 million after 10 years from one of the house bills. Fail.

[Junkdrawer]

16. Three details to look for:

1.) Who's allowed to buy the Public Option?

2.) Can they pay Medicare or close to Medicare rates?

3.) Are providers obligated to accept the coverage?

[bvar22]

31. Answers:

(According to HR 3200, the current House Bill, and the ONLY Bill toi be scored by the CBO)

1)Who's allowed to buy the Public Option?
ONLY those who are currently uninsured.
If you are currently receiving Health Insurance through your employer, you are not eligible for "The Public Option", even if it is cheaper and offers better benefits.
This is called a "Firewall" and guarantees that the MAJORITY of Americans will be ineligible for the Public Option.
Obama referred to this tonight when he said that the CBO estimates that less than 5% of Americans will be enrolled in the Public Option after 10 years.
By my math, it is LESS than 3%.
This is LAUGHABLE.
It is not near enough to "Keep the insurance Companies honest" or "open the door to Single Payer.

2.) Can they pay Medicare or close to Medicare rates?
Rates are "Medicare +5%. I believe these are the reimbursement rates to providers.


3.) Are providers obligated to accept the coverage?
No. Participation of providers is voluntary.
If less than 3% of the population is in the Public Option, expect providers to be few and far between.

[Junkdrawer]

37. Correct except for #2:

The Senate HELP bill prohibits Medicare rates and the House bill WAS Medicare + 5% until the Blue Dogs got to it...

...

The letter was an amazing end run around the political problem posed by the public option — i.e., its unassailable status as a more efficient and cheaper health care alternative. The Blue Dogs were demanding that the very thing that makes the public option work — curbing costs to taxpayers by reimbursing doctors at Medicare rates plus five percent — be scrapped. Instead, the Blue Dogs wanted compensation rates for doctors to be jacked up, on the government's tab. The very Democrats who make a point of boasting about their unwavering commitment to fiscal conservatism were lobbying, in essence, for a big fat piece of government pork for doctors. "Cost should be the number-one concern to the Blue Dogs," grouses Rep. Woolsey. "That's why they're Blue Dogs."

In the end, the Blue Dogs won. When the House commerce committee passed its bill, the public option no longer paid Medicare-plus-five-percent. Instead, it required the government to negotiate rates with providers, ensuring that costs would be dramatically higher. According to one Democratic aide, the concession would bump the price of the public option by $1,800 a year for the average family of four.

...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong/print

[ctaylors6]

39. I have a serious question.

If the final bill provides some kind of government insurance for 3-5% of the population, how is that different than simply adding those people to Medicaid? I understand it would not include the state/federal cost-sharing part of medicaid, but otherwise is it significantly different?

How does one qualify to buy the public option. I understand it's people who are uninsured by that's way more than 3-5%. What other criteria are used that winnows it down to that number?

[Hydra]

6. It's the perfect solution for his problem

The looney left demand a public option. The insurance companies demand their right to rob people be protected and expanded.

The solution? Mandatory coverage and a public option you can't sign up for.

[bread_and_roses]

9. yep. this aint what i worked for.

in fact, i really am ready to give up.

[glinda]

47. Me too. This sucks for me. I pay my own insurance because I am too ill to work.

It all comes from my husband's retirement savings.

[Mojambo]

7. Health insurance companies skim off the cream

And the public plan soaks up all the truly sick people.

Health Insurance ghetto.

[tsuki]

8. And so it would fail. We had that option in FL also, along with

co-ops. It was legislated away by the Republicons.

[abelenkpe2]

10. See that's how I understood it too

But apparently others feel it means there will definitely be a public option available to all.

It's an additional step. What, if you are deemed to be financially in need? If you make x amount you have to buy a plan?

Sounds like Fannie Mae of insurance. I gotta say, I'd rather have medicare for all or a government run program.

But maybe I'm not understanding it correctly.

[ipaint]

12. Perfect dumping ground for the sick with ins.

Watch for a massive dump of the sickest on private ins. right before it opens.

[flvegan]

13. Did I hear wrong, or would the public option still involve paying a premium

but one that would be allegedly lower because it would be non-for-profit and not-so-wasteful as the others?

Why am I not buying that this would work?

[LSK]

20. yes, that was always going to be the case

Even Thom Hartmanns proposal has this:


"Just pass a simple bill - it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people - that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=479407&mesg_id=479407

[Nikki Stone1]

14. A public option you have to pay for (it collects premiums) that will serve only 5% of the people

:(

[Miss Chybil]

15. He said the studies showed only about 5% of people would sign up for it.

Not that that's all that could sign up for it. If you don't have insurance, you can get it.

[ipaint]

24. He also said it wouldn't be subsidized by the government.

Since all the private plans will be I not quite sure why the public plan was single out.

[slipslidingaway]

17. knr nt

[liberalpragmatist]

21. None of this is new

This is true of the HOUSE bill that emerged in July. The public option is limited to the insurance exchange, and the only people eligible for the exchange are the self-unemployed, the long-term unemployed, and employees of small businesses.

So this is nothing new.

[blogslut]

22. So?

I am exactly the person that Public Option is for. Self employed. Pre-existing conditions and too poor to afford anything else.

[kwolf68]

52. Sounds JUST like my dad

Well, before he died after not receiving the the proper heart care. That was way back in 1988...still, he had atherosclerosis and wasn't even able to afford medicines, let alone the surgery that possibly would have fixed him.

My dad I guess didn't pull himself up by his bootstraps. He was a small business owner, with little money (his former partner embezzled tons of cash from him)...he lived on less than 100 bucks a week living in this one room cottage behind his place of business.

I am not in favor of loafers getting free care, but most people are trying to do right and we should help those people out.

[blogslut]

55. Thank you

There are a lot of people who work very hard for very little and it's a damn shame they are marginalized.

[treestar]

23. If you have insurance, you are covered.

You have a good job with insurance?

This is about providing health care to everyone. There are people with no insurance.

[Junkdrawer]

25. What if you work for WalMart and have really crappy insurance?

One of the nation's top employers?

[dana_b]

29. exactly!

my kids company offers terrible insurance. It's too expensive. So she HAS to buy this crap?!

[jtrockville]

49. Having insurance doesn't mean you can get health care.

So it seems this is more about providing insurance (no matter how awful it is) to everyone.

[redqueen]

26. OMG... are you saying that people who speculated were WRONG?!

Holy shit!

C'mon...

[KoKo]

28. I thought it was disappointing... I was hoping for something better...

[undeterred]

30. There are 50 million of us who don't have insurance.

That's a lot of people.

[bvar22]

33. And only 10 Million will be in the Public Option after 10 years.

That means a 40 Million person BONANZA for the For Profits!

[undeterred]

34. Where did you come up with the 10 million in 10 years figure?

[KoKo]

38. Here's a good article by Physicians for Health Care Reform..

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/20/bait-and-switch-how-the-%E2%80%9Cpublic-option%E2%80%9D-was-sold/

Hat Tip to the OP "Junkdrawer" who posted it last night and it's an excellent read.

[bvar22]

42. The Congressional Budget Office....

one of the few non-partisan bureaucracies in our government.
The CBO are the bean counters.
They usually get it right.

The CBO scored HR 3200 in August.
They also projected enrollment after 10 years.
This is the 5% Obama referred to in his speech.
Though by my math, it comes out to less than 3%.

[strategery blunder]

35. Guess I need to cancel my private insurance then...

No employer-provided insurance, individual policy here.

If I have to cancel my private insurance the day before PO becomes law then so be it.

I'll jettison 39% Claims Denial Rate for public option anytime.

I wonder if those with individual policies will be able to cancel right before PO enrollement period and say "I don't have insurance, sign me up."

Note: I'm 24 and in good health (though I could stand to lose a few pounds). The only burden I would impose on the system barring catastrophic illness or accident is a couple of doctor consultations as to how best lose that weight. :) Of course, I am afraid to have such consultations under my private insurance because I have gained that weight since I took the policy out (Bush years were depressing+comfort food) and I don't want them saying "You weigh more than you did when you filled out your application; your policy is rescinded."

[glinda]

53. I wonder if I can quit my insurance? My husband's retirement bonds pay for it now and

my insurance covers very little yet I pay 400/mo into it just in case I have a heart attack at this point. I cannot work due to needing major surgery. Would I be able to get help? Or would I be strapped to this hell hole of Blue Cross?

[ProSense]

36. "No one would be forced to choose it"

And no one will be forced to keep their employer's plan. So drop out of your plan and you will be mandated to buy coverage, then you can purchase insurance through the public option.

[Junkdrawer]

40. See post #11

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6504696&mesg_id=6504889

[Robb]

41. I know. Why can't people see this??

How anyone can parse this into no one getting into the public option is beyond me... because he trotted out the CBO's 5% estimate? That's nothing but a bone to the GOP.

[Toasterlad]

54. See Post #11

[ProSense]

57. See post #56. n/t

[Faryn Balyncd]

43. K & R - - - The public option MUST be available TO ALL WHO CHOOSE - - - We have compromised enough!!

[Faryn Balyncd]

44. Thanks for this post - - - This is one of 1000 ways K street has to cripple the public plan!!!!

[cushla_machree]

45. Here is what annoyes me

From Matt Taibbi:

If the HELP committee's grandfather clause survives to the final bill, those workers who did the sensible thing in rejecting Walmart's crap employer plan and taking the comparatively awesome insurance offered via Medicaid will now be rebuffed by the state and forced to take the dogshit Walmart offering.

So, if i have a shitty insurance plan at work, i am forced to take it? I don't want to pay into the crap HMO at my workplace, i would rather my hard earned money go into a public option. Now apparently i don't have this option, and if i decide to decline altogether, i will be mandating ie FORCED to pay private insurance companies.

[Junkdrawer]

46. This should be a MAJOR issue and it should be changed....

From what I'm reading, if your company has a crap plan, you have four choices:

1.) Quit

2.) Buy the crap plan

3.) Buy on your own outside the Exchange

4.) Pay the fines

[Political Heretic]

50. Too many people have been pretending that a Public Option was just another name for single payer.

It is not.

Not even remotely close.

It is at the very best, and incredibly narrow option that gets the foot in the door for the future.

In any form that it has been discussed in any committee, the Public option:

1. Has NEVER been available to everyone, but only a select frew
2. Has NEVER been free/subsidized, but always based on revenue generated from consumer premiums

[jtrockville]

51. It should be called a "SELECTED FEW" option, not PUBLIC option.

That would go a long way in eliminating the confusion, no?

[gulliver]

59. Doy! Why would you want to be insured twice?

If you have insurance and don't like it, you drop it. Then, doy, you don't have insurance.

[JVS]

61. He's wrong. Insurance companies provide a disservice and should be eliminated

[rucky]

62. That kinda takes the "option" out of the equation, eh?

[Junkdrawer]

66. Kick

:kick:

[Junkdrawer]

73. .

[demwing]

67. "They provide a legitimate service..." I disagree

they create profit by denying health benefits. The more caims denied, and the higher the premium paid, the greater the margin.

From a business perspective, it makes sense, but how in the hell is that legitimate from a health care perspective?

[Tampa Rob]

69. Absolutely correct. The bottom line issue that gets no airtime.

After being in Corporate America for 20 years - let me guarantee you that pure profit - at the expense of anything that might be morally correct and decent - is the sole, sole motive for 99% of companies. And that goes double for Health Care.

It's an oxymoron (if your goal is to provide decent Health Care) - the less you cover, the more you make.

You can't treat Health Care like building a highway. It's not the same thing.

Corporations were never meant to be Health arbiters and providers. It's simply another profit center to them - altruism is a laughable concept to these people.

TR

[demwing]

70. Welcome to DU Tampa Rob!

I'm just west of you in the Palm Harbor area.

[ecstatic]

72. I have individual insurance which is very expensive and

I'm not sure if they will actually have my back if my pre-existing condition (anemia) causes a problem. If my rates are lowered, I would stay with BCBS.