And after the Senate is finished weakening the bill, who knows, it might not kick in until 2020 or later or they may include a so-called trigger.
Read pages 117 and 14 of the House healthcare bill at:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdfA Daily Kos writer knew this a month ago:
My Thoughts On The Public Option In House Draft
by slinkerwink
Daily Kos
June 21, 2009
Here's what Wonk Room had to say about the House bill below:
"Unlike the HELP bill and the draft (leaked) language of the Senate Finance Committee, the Tri-Committee proposal seems to contain a fairly robust public insurance option. While details are still being worked out, the proposal establishes a public plan in 2013 that will compete with private insurers, within the Exchange, on a level playing field. The public option will be required to abide by all marketing, operations, and rating rules and would initially be allowed to use Medicare plus rates. After some time, the plan would have to independently negotiate fees with providers."
And there it seems that it might be wrong about the public option in the Tri-Committee proposal being available everywhere on day one. How can it be available on day one if it's supposed to be available in 2013 and the National Exchange that's proposed to cut down on costs is established in 2013 as well? This is one of the sticking points for us to push back on starting tomorrow. We'll have to ask the House Education and Labor Committee if the private insurers will have to be regulated immediately after the passage of the legislation or if the regulation starts in 2013. The delay for this puzzles me.
Always remember, the devil is in the details.
Another sticking point for us to push back on is that the public option will have to stop using Medicare plus rates at a certain point in time. Here's more from Karen Tumulty at Time Magazine on what that means:
"In the early stage, the public plan would reimburse health care providers at rates that are "similar to those used in Medicare"--that is, significantly lower than most private insurers pay them. This is something that the insurance industry, doctors and hospitals will all hate."
According to the summary, this tie to Medicare rates would be "severed over time as more flexible payment systems are developed." In other words, this public plan would eventually evolve into something that looks--and competes--more like a private insurance company, albeit one that happens to be run by the government."
This is the biggest sticking point for us to push back on along with the one about the public option having to be self-sustaining only on premiums, and we'll need to ask the Congressional Progressive Caucus to push back on this as well. Basically, we'll have a strong public option at first, but over time, it'll be weakened. I don't think this is right.
Please read the complete article and what you can do to demand a strong public option at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/21/745208/-My-...