Updated December 08, 2009
Watered-Down 'Public Plan' Emerges in Senate
AP
Private insurers -- not the government -- would offer coverage under a compromise Senate Democrats are considering.
WASHINGTON -- They may still call it a "public plan," but private insurers -- not the government -- would offer coverage under a compromise Democrats are considering to win Senate passage of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
The latest idea bears little resemblance to the original vision outlined by liberals, and embraced by Obama, during the 2008 presidential campaign. That called for the government to sell insurance to workers and their families in competition with industry giants like UnitedHealthcare.
But instead of Medicare-for-the-masses, it would be Blue Cross Blue Shield or Kaiser Permanente, albeit with a government seal of approval from the department that handles the health plan for federal employees, including members of Congress. The Office of Personnel Management -- OPM -- would become an instantly recognizable federal acronym, like FDA and CDC.
"I think it's the right way to go because it's simple and the public can grasp it," Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, said Monday, reflecting a general hope that a deal is close.
Lawmakers will be able to tell their constituents "you're going to get exactly what we have, and that every federal employee has, you can buy into it," Begich added.
Five moderates and five liberals tapped by Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., planned to work on the compromise Tuesday as the Senate debated the 10-year, nearly $1 trillion bill. A vote on an amendment to tightly restrict abortion coverage by health plans receiving federal subsidies could also happen Tuesday.
Reid imposed a Tuesday deadline to complete negotiations on the government-run option, according to Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, a participant in the talks.
"It's one of those kind of things in the middle that doesn't make everybody very happy but that's our compromise," Harkin said. "It's something I'm going to probably have to live with."
Said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont.: "It's probably the closest proposal thus far that could get the support of 60 senators. It's got legs."
Word of a possible compromise on the public plan drew a wary reaction from liberals, who support a Medicare-like approach.
"We need a public option that is a government entity, or established by government," said Richard Kirsch of Health Care for America Now.
Insurance industry groups had little to say publicly, but privately some officials said the shift away from a government-run plan sounds promising. There was plenty of skepticism.
"This is a long, long way from the original public plan that was going to require providers to accept Medicare reimbursement at 20 percent less than the commercial market," said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry consultant. "What the heck the advantage is, I don't see."
Liberals are trying to extract a price for any compromise. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., has proposed allowing people 55 and over to buy into Medicare. Others would further expand the Medicaid health program for low-income people. Finally, if private insurers don't step up to submit bids to OPM, some liberals want to authorize the federal agency itself to set up a plan.
The Senate bill now calls for a government-run plan, with states allowed to opt out. The House bill includes a government plan available in all states. Ongoing talks among Senate Democrats are nowhere near a conclusion; nonetheless, senators and aides outlined a framework that could lead to compromise.
The idea is for the government to lend its seal of approval to private plans that would be offered across the nation. The plans would be available through new state insurance markets, called exchanges. New markets would create big purchasing pools for those who now have trouble finding and keeping affordable coverage -- people buying their own insurance and small businesses. Most of the 30 million consumers in the exchanges would have government subsidies to help pay premiums.
Under the compromise, any insurer could approach the federal personnel office to offer a plan in the exchanges, but the plan itself would have to be nonprofit. Most Blue Cross plans are still nonprofit, as is Kaiser, the giant health maintenance organization.
Offered alongside other private insurance in the exchanges, the OPM-approved plans would carry a special designation certifying that they meet standards comparable to those in the federal employee plan.
Supporters of the idea say it would promote competition by creating new national plans that could immediately go into states in which one or two big insurers now control the market.
Skeptics say the OPM-approved plans would be pretty much the same as other private plans offered in the new markets. They run the risk of attracting sicker patients who might think the government's seal means less chance of insurance hassles. That would mean higher premiums for those who sign up.
Solving the impasse over a government plan would move Reid closer to the 60-vote majority he needs to push a final bill through the Senate. On Monday, one moderate whose vote Reid would like to have expressed satisfaction.
"I think the discussions are going in the right direction ... away from a government-run plan," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb.
Fox Nation
-
Inhofe Slams Gore on Climate 'Hoax'
March 15, 2010
-
J.D. Hayworth: 'You Could Marry Your Horse'
March 15, 2010
-
Another Billboard Controversy in Minnesota?
March 15, 2010
-
Obama's Health Care 'Victim' Exposed
March 15, 2010 4 comments
-
Audience Member Faints During Obama Rally
March 15, 2010
-
Obama: I Won't Raise $$$ for Dems Who Vote Against Health Bill
March 15, 2010 3 comments
-
Obama Makes Whopper of a Gaffe at Rally
March 15, 2010
-
Do You Stand With Stupak?
March 15, 2010 20 comments
-
Obama Taking Undecided Dems on Air Force One Rides
March 15, 2010 171 comments
-
Why Abortions Would Increase If Health Care Bill Passes
March 15, 2010 14 comments
Most Commented
-
Did Health Care Summit Accomplish Anything?
February 25, 2010 1,453 comments
-
Health Care Summit: How’s It Going?
February 24, 2010 1,270 comments
-
Was Tiger's Apology Good Enough for You?
February 19, 2010 1,255 comments
-
Does the 'Reconciliation' Gambit Make You Angry?
March 03, 2010 1,242 comments
-
Is Democrats' Health Care Reform Legislation Doomed?
March 10, 2010 1,147 comments

-
Burlingame and Joscelyn: Gitmo's Indefensible Lawyers
March 14, 2010
-
O'Grady: Democrats and Haiti Telecom
March 15, 2010
-
Higgins and Conway: Swing Districts Oppose Health Reform
March 14, 2010
-
Obama's Turn Against Israel
March 14, 2010
-
The Hedge Fund Wars
March 14, 2010


-
A rediscovered play adds to the Bard’s shifting reputation
March 15, 2010
-
Scandal, waste and waffle of EU diplomacy
March 15, 2010
-
Murder in Mexico brings the drug war home
March 15, 2010
-
It takes more than Play-Doh to plug a deficit
March 15, 2010
-
Our attitude to kids shows we need to grow up
March 15, 2010

-
Pelosi's Pampered Artists
March 15, 2010 9 comments
-
Chump Change
March 14, 2010 21 comments
-
Free Trade Watch
March 12, 2010 29 comments
-
Fiscal Responsibility is No Fun
March 12, 2010 28 comments
-
Pigs at the Trough
March 12, 2010 14 comments

-
The Accounting Trick that Inflated the Bubble
March 15, 2010
-
Greece's Problem? The New York Times
March 09, 2010 3 comments
-
Tired of Bailout Nation?
March 05, 2010 46 comments
-
The Case for Medical Malpractice Reform
March 03, 2010 32 comments
-
Another AIG Magical Mystery Tour
March 01, 2010 3 comments

-
Reading Wesley Smith: Why the Darwin Debate Matters
March 15, 2010
-
America's missing tragic sense
March 15, 2010
-
The Decline and Fall of Basicland
March 15, 2010
-
Mexican stoicism, American optimism
March 15, 2010
-
Brooks Nails it
March 15, 2010



recommend

Subscribe to Comments
