Sen. Mike Enzi, the ranking Republican on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, sits among copies of the health care reform bill and its amendments on June 17, before its markup hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington.
(Charles Dharapak/AP/File)Photos (1 of 1)
Why healthcare reform is still alive, despite initial cost estimates
Dire pronouncements aside, the process is just getting started, with legislation at a formative stage and Obama yet to offer his plan.
By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer/ June 23, 2009 edition
Reporter Linda Feldmann says the reported demise of healthcare reform by the Obama administration is greatly exaggerated.
Reporter Linda Feldmann
Washington
Cable news is already asking: “Is President Obama’s healthcare reform dead?”
This comes after Sunday talk show interviews with senators sounding doubtful notes – most sensationally, the statement by GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina calling cost estimates for Democratic plans a “death blow to a government-run healthcare plan.”
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California also raised eyebrows Sunday when she said that Mr. Obama may not have enough votes in the Senate to pass healthcare reform – a stunning statement given the Democrats’ large majority.
But the reality, budget experts say, is that healthcare reform is not dead – it’s just getting started. In fact, the White House has not even put out its own health reform proposal yet. The cost estimates that senators have been reacting to are not official. They’re preliminary estimates based on legislation as drafted. And one estimate – the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring of legislation from the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) chaired by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts – is based on just part of the committee’s plan.
The CBO reported that the 10-year cost of that plan would be $1 trillion and add only 16 million people to the ranks of the insured, out of a current uninsured population of 46 million. But the analysis “does not include elements of the plan that would further substantially reduce the number of uninsured,” write Robert Greenstein and Paul Van de Water of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The other CBO analysis that rang alarm bells was an initial estimated cost of $1.6 trillion over 10 years for the Senate Finance Committee’s preliminary plan. That number came in so high that committee chair Max Baucus (D) of Montana postponed consideration of the plan until July.
The House Democratic health plan unveiled on Friday has no price tag yet.
The problem with assessing the prospects of health reform now is that the discussion is about costs without the benefits, says Stan Collender, a budget expert at Qorvis Communications.
“It’s a little like getting halfway through a renovation of your home, and you’re saying, ‘Why on earth did I start this?’ ” says Mr. Collender. “You’ve got paint and dust everywhere, and you’re eating off a hot-plate in the basement. You’re kind of like that in the legislative process, which is, people are only seeing the cost, they’re not seeing what they’re going to get for it.”
By waiting to put out its own plan, or endorse someone else’s, the Obama administration is keeping its options open while gleaning valuable information on what may or may not fly in a final package. While some Republicans rail against the idea of a government-run insurance plan that would compete against the private insurers, a New York Times/CBS News poll found that 72 percent of the public supports this “public option.” The poll, released Saturday, also found that 57 percent of the public is willing to pay more taxes to insure the uninsured.
The White House has said it can save $622 billion in healthcare costs over 10 years by cutting hospital subsidies for the uninsured and cutting costs in Medicaid and Medicare.
Ultimately, CBO estimates, which loom large in the public-relations battle over reform, are subject to revision. Sen. Christopher Dodd (D) of Connecticut, who is filling in for the ailing Senator Kennedy on the HELP Committee, said Thursday that committee members would meet with CBO officials early this week. The CBO prides itself on being immune to partisan lobbying, but is always open to reassessing its estimates when presented with new information.
Comments
2. Paul Grantham | 06.23.09
In a country that spends over $ 2.7 Trillion dollars on health care EACH YEAR, it wouldn’t take much improvement in costs to cover $1.6 Trillion in 10 years. Also, I wonder where these Senators with cost concerns were when they quickly approved a war that has cost the country over $2 Trillion in less than 6 years.
The last I looked the constitution doesn’t guarantee any company to make profits at the expense of the common good. It seems some of these Senators have already been bought off by the insurance companies.
3. Nancy | 06.23.09
It’s not health care that is so expensive, it’s the salaries of the Insurance Execs! bit.ly/OidHP (Doctor’s incomes have not gone up significantly except in a few specialties, such as surgery.) With a serious competitor, maybe those private companies would cut some costs at the top.
Think about how expensive it is when someone with a manageable illness has to quit work or be fired so they can go on Welfare because their private insurance company has canceled their policy! See bit.ly/CZdCP
Thanks,
Nancy
4. JO | 06.23.09
Bring it to a vote and let all Americans see who is choosing to shoot down healthcare. We are a disgrace in the world and a public health emergency waiting to happen. We are allowing good people to die because of greed.
Take away health insurance from Congress. When they come up for a way for the average american to get insurance at a reasonable price, they can have it back. We are paying for their healthcare for life. About time they repaid the favor.
5. Tom in Topeka | 06.23.09
If they are worried about the government coming between me and my doctor, why don’t they introduce legislation to prohibit an insurance company from coming between me and my doctor?
6. emma danielson | 06.23.09
Why is everyone so concerned about insurance companies? They write more than healthcare insurance and will survive very nicely without it. Is the entire House and Senate beholden to them because of their PACs and contributions to campaign funds? Shame! They should consider what is best and least expensive for the general population.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.




1. Hiro Butani | 06.23.09
What We Need is a Change in the System. The number of Primary Care Walk in Clinics should increased. The system of asking every health plan patient or member to visit the nearest hospital in case of Emergency should also needs a change.
Most existing Community and Health Plan Clinics are over burdened or crowded and as such patients complain of disparities,families should be trained in first aid instead of rushing to hospitals or clinics for minor ailments and should think positive that they are not going to die and should control their habits ( good and bad) and have faith in the Lord.