Since we all get sick and we all need a doctor now and then to help us get better, let’s dive into the health care reform proposals thus far on the table in Congress and take a look at where it’s all going.
First, the facts
- 47 million Americans uninsured
- Annual overall U.S. spending on health care is $2.2 trillion
- Annual U.S. costs per person is about $7,000
- The tab for reforming health care is expected to be about $1 trillion over 10 years
- Obama wants to pass health care legislation before Congress goes on vacation in August
Ok, on to where we are with the proposed bills
Two versions of legislation moved forward this week, one in the House and another in the Senate. There’s a third proposal still sitting in the Senate Finance Committee (remember a bill usually begins in a House or Senate committee where it is “marked up” and then voted on so that eventually the full chamber can vote on it), which you’ll likely hear more about next week. The House version could be put to a full vote in the next couple of weeks.
The main details to take away
Both of the versions so far include: 1) a government-subsidized health-insurance option, and 2) a penalty charge on small businesses that don’t provide coverage to their employees. They’re also both meeting criticism over methods to pay for the program. So far the votes have been largely down party lines with a few Democrats voting with Republicans against the plans.
The House bill is taking heat because it proposes taxing top earners in the United States—individuals making $280,000 and above and couples making $350,000 and above. The more you make, the more you're taxed, ranging from 1 to 5.4 percent.
House Democrats (who have the majority) say these charges would cover about half the costs and the rest would come in spending cuts on Medicare and Medicaid. Either way, the Congressional Budget Office, which analyzes initiatives with budget implications on the government, says the measure would actually add to U.S. health care costs.
What exactly a government-provided health insurance option would look like is still a little murky but the idea is that it would not discriminate based on previous health conditions and would offer affordable options plus government subsidies for people who aren’t covered by a job in particular. We hope to hear more details about this soon.
The big picture
The fear among some is that this is nationalizing health care and that a government option will kill competition among private insurers. The flip side says there’s already plenty of competition. The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis in fact found that premiums in the government option would be about the same as private options. And there are many questions about how much the government would pay to health providers, another big concern of those in the medical field.
Taxing the wealthy has been a major point of contention for many people. The famous economist Robert Shiller however this week said he thinks high-income earners should pay more in taxes and suggested Americans need a better sense of community. Other politicians assert that there are other ways to reform health care without creating a government option—they talk about Health Spending Accounts where you set aside your own money in a savings account and pay for portions of health care out of that account.
We’re in for a busy few weeks in Washington as this reform gets hammered out. There are a lot of moving parts and many points of contention, to include many not wanting to add to the national debt, which is already $11.5 trillion.
Both of the versions so far include: 1) a government-subsidized health-insurance option, and 2) a penalty charge on small businesses that don’t provide coverage to their employees. They’re also both meeting criticism over methods to pay for the program. So far the votes have been largely down party lines with a few Democrats voting with Republicans against the plans.
The House bill is taking heat because it proposes taxing top earners in the United States—individuals making $280,000 and above and couples making $350,000 and above. The more you make, the more you're taxed, ranging from 1 to 5.4 percent.
House Democrats (who have the majority) say these charges would cover about half the costs and the rest would come in spending cuts on Medicare and Medicaid. Either way, the Congressional Budget Office, which analyzes initiatives with budget implications on the government, says the measure would actually add to U.S. health care costs.
What exactly a government-provided health insurance option would look like is still a little murky but the idea is that it would not discriminate based on previous health conditions and would offer affordable options plus government subsidies for people who aren’t covered by a job in particular. We hope to hear more details about this soon.
The big picture
The fear among some is that this is nationalizing health care and that a government option will kill competition among private insurers. The flip side says there’s already plenty of competition. The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis in fact found that premiums in the government option would be about the same as private options. And there are many questions about how much the government would pay to health providers, another big concern of those in the medical field.
Taxing the wealthy has been a major point of contention for many people. The famous economist Robert Shiller however this week said he thinks high-income earners should pay more in taxes and suggested Americans need a better sense of community. Other politicians assert that there are other ways to reform health care without creating a government option—they talk about Health Spending Accounts where you set aside your own money in a savings account and pay for portions of health care out of that account.
We’re in for a busy few weeks in Washington as this reform gets hammered out. There are a lot of moving parts and many points of contention, to include many not wanting to add to the national debt, which is already $11.5 trillion.
Comments