Max Baucus battles irrelevancy

September 7, 2009 · Posted in Healthcare reform, News and Current Affairs 

The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and supposed leader of the useless “Gang of Six,” rushes out his “bi-partisan compromise” healthcare reform bill, before the president can present his ideas to a joint session of Congress, but long after the world stopped paying attention. From the Washington Post today:

The Baucus plan, circulating among the Finance Committee’s “Gang of Six” this weekend, sets forth provisions that have already gained the group’s unofficial support and adds nothing new to the mix that the group has not already deliberated, senior Senate aides said. But Democrats are wary that two of the three GOP negotiators — Sens. Charles Grassley (Iowa) and Mike Enzi (Wyo.) could still walk away, under pressure from their Republican colleagues to allow Democrats to fight for a bill on their own.

Or more to the point, for no bill at all. I won’t bother to list the provisions in the Baucus plan. Suffice it to say it has $400 million in Medicare cuts that won’t pass, private, wimpy co-ops that nobody but those living 100 miles from their nearest neighbor cares for, and a “no shit, Sherlock” insurance exchange. Plus it ups the cap for Medicaid. If you want to read more, have at it. The real bottom line is that the Baucus process is now utterly irrelevant, since two of the three Republicans in the Gang of Six have already declared war on the president, including any health reform he might be interested in.

Worse, Baucus’ “plan” wouldn’t even improve healthcare — even if it did matter — which it doesn’t — his proposal would more than likely make things worse:

Baucus’s proposal will cost between $850 billion and $900 billion, which he plans to pay for by taxing insurance companies on their most expensive policies. “The hope is that employers would buy cheaper, less generous coverage for employees, thereby reducing the overuse of medical services,” according to the New York Times. This means employers will provide less healthcare coverage for their employees, who will then have to pay for their healthcare out-of-pocket, which effectively passes the cost for Baucus’s plan to hardworking men and women.

In July, former healthcare executive Wendell Potter told me about these kinds of “consumer-driven plans,” a euphemistic term for shifting the financial burden from insurance company to consumer. Pottter explained that these plans feature high deductibles and are really just another way for the insurance companies to make money from the suffering of their consumers. Baucus isn’t proposing a reform solution that will benefit a majority of Americans in his latest proposal. He’s literally shifting the burden from the insurance companies to employers, and ultimately employees. Baucus is actually maximizing the suffering of a majority of Americans.

California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi told the Associated Press in 2005 when he was serving as the state’s insurance commissioner, the movement toward consumer-driven coverage will eventually result in a “death spiral” for managed care plans. Unlike “death panels,” “death spirals” are the real deal. Garamendi explained that this will happen as consumer-driven plans “cherry-pick” the youngest, healthiest and richest customers while forcing managed care plans to charge more to cover the sickest patients. The result, he predicted, will be more uninsured people.

In other words, the White House should do what I can only pray they’re doing now: pay no attention to Max Baucus.

Comments

2 Responses to “Max Baucus battles irrelevancy”

  1. Melvin Brown on September 8th, 2009 5:03 pm

    If a person is poor and cannot afford health coverage, how in the world can Baucas fine them for not having coverage. They don’t have any money.

    Medicare reemburment to doctors stinks and that leads someone like me to buy a supplement at $250 a month to even get a doctor. They don’t pay squat either.

    This whole system is in disaray.

  2. JReid on September 8th, 2009 5:16 pm

    Great points, Melvin. Personally, I don’t think Baucus is serious. He is just trying to appear relevant long after he and his Gang of Six no longer are.

Leave a Reply




Switch to our mobile site