HELP’s Plan Gets Thumbs Up

President Obama is abroad this week in Russia, Italy and Africa, but the health care debate continues in Congress.

Last week the Senate HELP committee released its latest version of the bill, which would cover 97 percent of Americans, share responsibility with employers and individuals, and create a strong public plan to compete with private insurers. And it aligns with President Obama’s three stated principles for reform: lowering costs, preserving choice and expanding access to quality, affordable care.

New York Times columnist and economist Paul Krugman wrote about the HELP plan in his column on Sunday:

"…But last week the budget office scored the full proposed legislation from the Senate committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP). And the news — which got far less play in the media than the downbeat earlier analysis — was very, very good. Yes, we can reform health care.

"…Now, about those specifics: The HELP plan achieves near-universal coverage through a combination of regulation and subsidies. Insurance companies would be required to offer the same coverage to everyone, regardless of medical history; on the other side, everyone except the poor and near-poor would be obliged to buy insurance, with the aid of subsidies that would limit premiums as a share of income.

"Employers would also have to chip in, with all firms employing more than 25 people required to offer their workers insurance or pay a penalty. By the way, the absence of such an “employer mandate” was the big problem with the earlier, incomplete version of the plan.

"And those who prefer not to buy insurance from the private sector would be able to choose a public plan instead. This would, among other things, bring some real competition to the health insurance market, which is currently a collection of local monopolies and cartels.

"The budget office says that all this would cost $597 billion over the next decade. But that doesn’t include the cost of insuring the poor and near-poor, whom HELP suggests covering via an expansion of Medicaid (which is outside the committee’s jurisdiction). Add in the cost of this expansion, and we’re probably looking at between $1 trillion and $1.3 trillion.

"There are a number of ways to look at this number, but maybe the best is to point out that it’s less than 4 percent of the $33 trillion the U.S. government predicts we’ll spend on health care over the next decade. And that in turn means that much of the expense can be offset with straightforward cost-saving measures, like ending Medicare overpayments to private health insurers and reining in spending on medical procedures with no demonstrated health benefits.

"So fundamental health reform — reform that would eliminate the insecurity about health coverage that looms so large for many Americans — is now within reach…"

The AP just posted a good roundup of the different plans currently moving through Congress.

Comments are now closed for this entry.