Democrats Also "Poo-Poo" Senator Max Baucus' Healthcare Reform Bill.
Democrats Worry Bill Will Cost Families Too Much
By GREG HITT and JANET ADAMY
WASHINGTON -- Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus came under new pressure Tuesday from Democrats concerned that his health bill could force some middle-income families to take on sizable new costs for health coverage.
The Montana Democrat said he will formally unveil the legislation on Wednesday. That would set the stage for Finance Committee action next week, and debate in the full Senate next month.
The Baucus bill is designed to expand coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans, while slowing the rate of growth of health-care costs. Mr. Baucus has worked to attract Republicans, in part by keeping the 10-year cost of the legislation below $900 billion, a target endorsed by President Barack Obama.
But even as Republicans remain unhappy with key aspects of the bill, liberal critics complain that it would force many lower- and middle-income workers to shoulder a greater financial burden when complying with the bill's mandate to buy insurance, by paring federal tax subsidies.
"This is not like shaving off things, this is reducing coverage for poor and working people," House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) said Monday. Mr. Rangel is an architect of the $1 trillion House health-care bill, which provides more generous subsidies.
Some Senate Democrats are voicing similar concerns. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) on Monday said there was "no way I can vote for the package" without changes. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) vowed to seek additional subsidies, or possibly a new tax break, aimed at helping working families, when the bill comes before committee. "Fundamentally, we're doing this for American families, and we need to make sure this is affordable," she said.
The Baucus bill would provide federal subsidies to individuals and families with incomes as high as 300% of the federal poverty line. For people whose incomes fall between 300% and 400% of the poverty line, the bill would cap premiums at 13% of income.
Critics complain the 13% cap is too high and would impose unreasonable costs on middle-income family budgets. But Finance Committee aides argue that tens of millions of Americans would still benefit from the cap.
Mr. Baucus said that because his bill would expand insurance coverage for Americans, "middle-class families are going to be much better off than they currently are." In an op-ed published Wednesday in The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Baucus said the "current system is simply unsustainable," and noted his bill would help small businesses and families stressed by the rapid growth in health costs. "The status quo is no longer an option," he said.
Republicans, meanwhile, have been seeking other changes to the bill. In private negotiations led by Mr. Baucus, Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) made a push this week to drop the proposed mandate requiring individuals to buy insurance. Instead, he has proposed creating a new "reinsurance pool" to help spread the risks associated with high-cost patients.
In a statement released late Tuesday, Mr. Grassley complained the Senate Democratic leadership is imposing an "artificial deadline" on the bipartisan talks led by Mr. Baucus, but vowed to "continue to work with" the chairman.
Health Care for America Now, a liberal advocacy group, estimates that a family of four earning $77,175 a year could pay as much as $10,033 a year for health insurance under Sen. Baucus's proposal. That is about $2,000 a year more than they would pay under a health bill passed through the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, as well as under two of the three bills passed through House committees.
Mr. Baucus's bill would also place higher caps than other versions on the amount consumers would pay for out-of-pocket health-care expenses. It would allow insurance companies to charge older customers premiums that are as much as five times as high as those for younger customers, a provision sought by insurance companies. The other bills would restrict them from charging older customers more than twice as much.
—Patrick Yoest contributed to this article.
Write to Greg Hitt at greg.hitt@wsj.com and Janet Adamy at janet.adamy@wsj.com
By GREG HITT and JANET ADAMY
WASHINGTON -- Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus came under new pressure Tuesday from Democrats concerned that his health bill could force some middle-income families to take on sizable new costs for health coverage.
The Montana Democrat said he will formally unveil the legislation on Wednesday. That would set the stage for Finance Committee action next week, and debate in the full Senate next month.
The Baucus bill is designed to expand coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans, while slowing the rate of growth of health-care costs. Mr. Baucus has worked to attract Republicans, in part by keeping the 10-year cost of the legislation below $900 billion, a target endorsed by President Barack Obama.
But even as Republicans remain unhappy with key aspects of the bill, liberal critics complain that it would force many lower- and middle-income workers to shoulder a greater financial burden when complying with the bill's mandate to buy insurance, by paring federal tax subsidies.
"This is not like shaving off things, this is reducing coverage for poor and working people," House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) said Monday. Mr. Rangel is an architect of the $1 trillion House health-care bill, which provides more generous subsidies.
Some Senate Democrats are voicing similar concerns. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) on Monday said there was "no way I can vote for the package" without changes. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) vowed to seek additional subsidies, or possibly a new tax break, aimed at helping working families, when the bill comes before committee. "Fundamentally, we're doing this for American families, and we need to make sure this is affordable," she said.
The Baucus bill would provide federal subsidies to individuals and families with incomes as high as 300% of the federal poverty line. For people whose incomes fall between 300% and 400% of the poverty line, the bill would cap premiums at 13% of income.
Critics complain the 13% cap is too high and would impose unreasonable costs on middle-income family budgets. But Finance Committee aides argue that tens of millions of Americans would still benefit from the cap.
Mr. Baucus said that because his bill would expand insurance coverage for Americans, "middle-class families are going to be much better off than they currently are." In an op-ed published Wednesday in The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Baucus said the "current system is simply unsustainable," and noted his bill would help small businesses and families stressed by the rapid growth in health costs. "The status quo is no longer an option," he said.
Republicans, meanwhile, have been seeking other changes to the bill. In private negotiations led by Mr. Baucus, Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) made a push this week to drop the proposed mandate requiring individuals to buy insurance. Instead, he has proposed creating a new "reinsurance pool" to help spread the risks associated with high-cost patients.
In a statement released late Tuesday, Mr. Grassley complained the Senate Democratic leadership is imposing an "artificial deadline" on the bipartisan talks led by Mr. Baucus, but vowed to "continue to work with" the chairman.
Health Care for America Now, a liberal advocacy group, estimates that a family of four earning $77,175 a year could pay as much as $10,033 a year for health insurance under Sen. Baucus's proposal. That is about $2,000 a year more than they would pay under a health bill passed through the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, as well as under two of the three bills passed through House committees.
Mr. Baucus's bill would also place higher caps than other versions on the amount consumers would pay for out-of-pocket health-care expenses. It would allow insurance companies to charge older customers premiums that are as much as five times as high as those for younger customers, a provision sought by insurance companies. The other bills would restrict them from charging older customers more than twice as much.
—Patrick Yoest contributed to this article.
Write to Greg Hitt at greg.hitt@wsj.com and Janet Adamy at janet.adamy@wsj.com
Labels: Public health
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 5:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home