Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MIT Economist Confirms Senate Health Reform Bill Reduces Costs and Improves Coverage

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 08:53 PM
Original message
MIT Economist Confirms Senate Health Reform Bill Reduces Costs and Improves Coverage
Edited on Sun Nov-29-09 08:58 PM by Clio the Leo
A new analysis by a leading MIT economist provides new ammunition for Democrats as the Senate begins formally debating the historic health-reform bill being pushed by President Barack Obama.


The report concludes that under the Senates health-reform bill, Americans buying individual coverage will pay less than they do for today's typical individual market coverage, and would be protected from high out-of-pocket costs.


So Democrats will argue that under the Senate bill, Americans would pay less for more.


The new document arms Democrats with a response to the contention of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) that the bill would mean higher premiums, higher taxes, and massive cuts to Medicare.


The microsimulation analysis is by Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Treasury Department official under President Bill Clinton. Gruber used data from the Congressional Budget Office.


Gruber concludes that people purchasing individual insurance would save an annual $200 (singles) to $500 (families) in 2009 dollars. And people with low incomes would receive premium tax credits that would reduce the price that they pay for health insurance by as much as $2,500 to $7,500.


The report will be circulated to Capitol Hill this week.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29959.html


Read Report Here
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM145_final_try.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good Luck to the Dems when
they debate this in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Starts tomorrow I think. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. GOD I wish this would get the publicity it so richly deserves.. .
Edited on Sun Nov-29-09 09:04 PM by annabanana
Sadly, I expect it will get, maybe, one brief mention, mid-cast.. no teasers, and very little discussion. (Except of course by the remaining two or three actual NEWS people out there)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Well, Big Ed BETTER be shouting about it on MSNBC tomorrow...
.... and he very well may. He likes the Senate bill.

Would love to see KO leading off with it (or a story that included it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpartanDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Not likely when people on the left and right are determined ignore the truth
This is story has posted throughout DU and it's been largely ingnored. But let someone write a polemic how this bill greatest sellout in history, that we need a revolution and watch the thread 100 recs in the blink of an eye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
5. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. This better be all over the media by tomorrow!!!!!!
DAMN IT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcablue Donating Member (625 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
8. Does this mean we don't need a public option?
Edited on Sun Nov-29-09 09:37 PM by mcablue
Remember, this bill contains no public option. Do the high recommendations mean that we believe a public option is unnecessary to lower costs? Have we been unfair to Max Baucus?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. In case there's some confusion.....
Edited on Sun Nov-29-09 10:39 PM by Clio the Leo
..... ;)

From the Congressional Budget Office...



http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10731/Reid_letter_1...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcablue Donating Member (625 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Sorry, wrong bill
I erroneously thought this study was about some other plan that did not include the public option. Thanks for the correction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-29-09 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. lol, no worries....
.... I've edited my reply to remove the snark.

I was thinking, "ok NOW I have heard it all!" :)

It DOES get confusing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-30-09 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #8
15. the bill includes a public option unless a state opts out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-30-09 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. K & R &
All that good stuff.

Great Post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quakerboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-30-09 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
13. $200?
that seems underwhelming, but it is better than increases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-30-09 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. You can give the $200 to me if if you like. I can use it. ;-) NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-30-09 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
14. They negelected to mention that the coverage is shitty
--and will really screw people aged 55-64. Of course, individual market coverage is pretty shitty too. The proposed MANDATORY private insurance is better only in the sense that diarrhea is better than colon cancer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 22nd 2014, 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC