Health care’s ‘public option’ would cover little of population
A proposed government-run health indemnity program, among the most discordant issues in the health care debate, would take in less than 1.5% of the population, new estimates show.
The latest version of the “public option,” included in the 10-year, $848 billion health care bill headed toward an initial Senate vote Saturday, would take in up to 4 million people, according to the Congressional Budget Office report unrestricted late Wednesday night.
The issue remains among those that have prevented Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid from securing the 60 votes he needs to pass the bill.
Paul Ginsburg, an economist with the Center for Studying Health System Change, questions the impact the public option proposals would have on families seeking health coverage.
“The type of public option we’re talking about today … is all about ideology and symbolism,” he said. “It’s not going to have any impact on our health system.”
SIDE-BY-SIDE: Comparing the House and Senate health bills
Reid, D-Nev., scheduled a weekend vote to determine whether the Senate will start debate on its health care plot , which includes a public indemnity program that individual states could choose not to offer residents.
The public plot was conceived as a separate indemnity policy that would operate like Medicare, the government-run health program for seniors. President Obama has said a public option would “keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable.”
Below the House and Senate bills, the government option would be available only to people who shop for indemnity on their own — meaning they don’t get coverage through work — or who work for small firms. The plot would be offered alongside private policies in online “exchanges” that would let people compare coverage and prices.
Like private insurers, the public plot ’s funding would come from premiums, but Republicans and some Democrats, including Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, say its non-profit reputation would give it an unfair advantage. “A government plot is eventually going to crowd out the private indemnity companies’ plans,” said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.
The public plot included in the House bill would take in 6 million people, the Congressional Budget Office predicted. The analysis predicted that the public plot would pull towards you less healthy patients and that its average premiums would be “somewhat higher” than private plans.
The Senate bill would let states opt out of the public plot . States that are home to one-third of the population would be likely to do so, the CBO predicts.
Jacob Hacker, a Yale University political scientist who first proposed the public option, said the plot would still drive down health care costs despite the changes. For one thing, he said, it would offer consumers another choice in rural parts of the country where only one or two insurers offer policies.
Indemnity companies oppose the program. Karen Ignagni, head of the trade group America’s Health Indemnity Plans, says the public plot would underpay doctors, forcing them to shift the cost to patients with private coverage.
Below pressure from fellow Democrats, Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., reduced the plot ’s power. Unlike Medicare, which decides how much to pay doctors for services, the public plot would negotiate with doctors as private insurers do.
Mail this post