This article is from Reuters. The study was done by PriceWaterhouseCoopers. The Reuters story goes over some the key conclusions of the PCW study, but I couldn’t find the actual study itself. Perhaps it will be released later in the week. The Senate Finance bill is supposed to be voted on as early as tomorrow. Then it goes to the full Senate (if passed) for about 2 weeks of debate. This means we could see something taking shape as soon as the end of this month.
Seems pretty common-sensical (is that a word?) that if I’m healthy and know that I’ll be guaranteed issue a health policy if I get sick and my only penalty is $750/year, I might be inclined NOT to buy health insurance. Paradoxically, if I’m unhealthy and uninsured and now can buy health insurance, I’d be inclined to buy it. By having healthy people not buying and unhealthy people buying, logic dictates that premiums would increase faster than if we did nothing. There’s more to the story than just that and a lot depends on what other measures are taken to incent healthy people to buy and buffer the cost of the unhealthy.
The Reuters story also reference the fact that the CBO numbers anticipate a 25% reduction in Medicare’s Payment to Physicians in 2011 (Physician’s Fee Schedule). I’m not sure why there isn’t much talk about this, since the Fee Schedule will inevitably get “fixed” next year (anyone want to wager me on the Doc’s taking a 25% pay cut in 2011?) and thus push Health Care Reform pretty deep into the red.
The idea of the government getting involved in running a business like health insurance is ludicrous- to this day its advocates cannot tell us how much the premiums will be, or what services will be available and the out-of-pocket costs. Nor can they begin to estimate how many people would choose a public option over their own current healthcare, and this will have a massive impact on its ability to break even (and thus not add massively to the national debt).
Click here for more information.
How like our “socialistic” Pres, to speak out when anyone speaks out against him and his proposals. The study was performed by an Independent Agency, not the insurance companies. It’s high time, someone in the insurance industry wasn’t in tune with AARP who has their own agenda (not the seniors). And so what if the insurance carriers have something to say in regard to a government run health insurance plan? It’s their livelihood (and ours) for God’s sake! How about if we make cuts to the beuracracy? I know, cut out one of the “Houses”? After all, do we really still need 2? (let’s rent it out to Walmart).