• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

High Premiums in Senate Democrats’ Health Plan

Strucky

.
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
2,075
Reaction score
504
Location
unknown
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
High Premiums in Senate Democrats’ Health Plan

By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats have provided few details about their latest health care proposal, but this much seems clear: Anyone who wants to buy the same health benefits as members of Congress, or to buy coverage through Medicare, should be prepared to fork over a large chunk of cash.


According to the Congressional Budget Office, a family of four earning $54,000 in 2016, when the health legislation is fully in effect, would be eligible for a subsidy of $10,100 to help defray the cost of insurance under the health legislation being debated by the Senate. By then, one of the most popular federal plans, a nationwide Blue Cross and Blue Shield policy, is projected to cost more than $20,000.

That could leave the family earning $54,000, slightly more than the current median household income, with monthly premium costs of more than $825.

The Democrats’ proposal would also allow some people ages 55 to 64 to “buy in” to Medicare, starting in 2011. That could cost about $7,600 a year per person or $15,200 for a couple, according to a budget office analysis of an earlier version of the concept. No subsidies would be available until 2014.

Senate Democrats have been careful to say that their proposal is not intended to offer exactly the same benefits that members of Congress have. In many cases, federal subsidies would cover a smaller share of the premium than what the government contributes to the cost of health insurance for federal employees.

The Medicare buy-in proposal is intended to fill a gap in the social safety net for millions of people nearing retirement who are unable to obtain or afford insurance. In general, the new Medicare option would be available only to people who are uninsured. People 55 to 64 who have employer-sponsored insurance would be expected to keep it.

----------

First off,I thought Health "reform" was suppose to lower insurance premiums....Not dramatically jack them up.

Second,if the Medicare eligibility age is lowered to 55....How in the hell are they going to "save" $400 billion by adding more people?
 
Last edited:
First off,I thought Health "reform" was suppose to lower insurance premiums....Not dramatically jack them up.

Premiums are higher as a gross value but the net, after subsidies are attached, will be lower supposedly.

The impact of the legislation would be much less dramatic on most people, who receive coverage through their jobs, according to Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Such people's premiums would be unchanged or slightly lower once insurance reforms proposed under the Senate plan were fully implemented,

Here is another article that expands on topics the OP article limits.
Capitol Briefing - CBO: Senate health plan will increase some premiums -- and expand coverage


Second,if the Medicare eligibility age is lowered to 55....How in the hell are they going to "save" $400 billion by adding more people?

According to the article they are "buying in" to Medicare so the costs to cover those people should be covered by the income generated from their buying in. I don't know if that's the case here but that's how insurance generally works when people buy into plans.
 
Last edited:
1. the only thing the 10 agreed to in reid's closet was to send a certain plan to cbo

2. reid fundamentally misrepresented a consensus that wasn't there

3. the plan was to expand medicare to 20 to 30 million americans while trying to cut it half a tril over the next 10 years

4. while medicare all the time is facing THIRTY FOUR TRILLION dollars of unfunded liability

5. they're trying to defy gravity

6. they would absolutely KILL medicare

7. and they know it, everyone knows it

8. it's just to provide political cover for that skinny presidential ass

9. it will savage health care in rural areas cuz medicare pays so low, it's schedule pays so much more in nyc than in dakota

10. THIS is WHY reid's keeping everybody in the dark, which is insufferably insulting to EVERY ONE of us, all stripes, after all we've been thru on this issue

11. overarching all this is the DEBT and the raising of the DEBT CEILING

12. great scheduling, there, dems

13. once more, you really show you know how to work the game

14. omnipresent olympia, jiltin joe and stiff neck nelson all spoke against it today

15. snowe---expanding medicare "exacerbates the problem" because of the low rates it pays, it could force me to vote no, i don't think we can even tweak it

16. ah, but will you oppose it, ms snowe?

17. it's "among other issues," "this is part of it"

18. and that's after snowe met with obama on wednesday

19. lieberman---i'm "increasingly concerned," medicare's viability and premiums, "increasingly troubled"

20. stiffneck BEN nelson (the stupak of upstairs)---it's an intermediary to a govt run plan and "i do not like" that, i wouldn't be surprised if it becomes not a viable option, it's going to be the "lesser of popular things," but i'm keeping an open mind

21. even ardent supporters (mikulski) are saying there are too many questions and not enough answers

22. well, none of the above is breaking news, it's sposed to be common knowledge

23. but this afternoon a HUGE development

24. the non partisan actuary for the CMS, subsidiary of HHS, reported this afternoon---the reid merge will increase the deficit by 200B and will force 20% of hospitals into the red

25. these are the white house's own numbers, here

26. remember, it's numbers the members are all waiting for

27. and cms' figuring doesn't even include reid's medicare expansion

28. BILL nelson, florida (a HUGE development)---i'm "lukewarm," i expect cbo to return an unfriendly score, it looks like a "non starter"

28. john mccain---it's a stake thru the heart of health care

30. the maverick is right

31. it's back to the drawing board

32. reid is open this weekend, he wanted to close to go to new orleans for a fundraiser

33. but republicans kept him in to vote on the debt ceiling

34. he had to shelve health care, however, yesterday, 56 to 43, forced by republican procedurisms, so he could deal with budget stuff he has to get off his filthy table before 2010

35. very temporary shelving, of course, he'll pick it back up immediately

36. unless he thinks he's getting nowhere, which he is

37. they're still waiting for cbo, can't move til then

38. and vacation for them is sposed to start next friday

39. reid hates to let them get back to their districts where they always hear hell

40. and they're not sposed to return to dc til january

41. with state of the union in feb

42. wiener, super proponent of public option, on msnbc minutes ago---"it's a major problem"

43. another way to see this is a rebellion on the part of membership against reid

44. now, reid whines (exactly like his boss)---the gop is trying to "denigrate" me

45. what a loser

Moderates uneasy with Medicare plan - - POLITICO.com

Senate Pauses on Health Bill to Take Up Spending Measures - Prescriptions Blog - NYTimes.com

Reid Asks Republicans for Weekend Off, Has Big Easy Fundraiser to Get To - The Note

FOXNews.com - Reid Criticizes GOP Questioning His Abandoning Health Care Votes for Fundraiser

Senate Aide: There Is No Deal - Robert Costa - The Corner on National Review Online
 
Last edited:
If the dumb ass Dims(no spell error) are trying to turn peaceful protesters into hateful mobs they are going down the right road. I am retired and because of medical issues and there is no way in hell I'm going pay for any of these rip off plans.

Normally I'd have something to say that is calm and well thought out but I'm sick to damb death of Reid and Pelosi. I have never hit a woman in my life but I may have to make an exception and seek out at slap the living sheiite out Reid the beatch pisses me off. I would touch Pelosi she looks like a carrier of some sort of disease one gets and it makes you a stupid Liberal.

Most of us can't begin to afford these costs and still do little things like eat, and pay for housing, utilities, and little extravagances like that.

Few us regular citizens get the retirement perks given to the Anti-Americans in the House, Senate, and White House. These people are asking for serious trouble.

We need more people running for office like this.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M"]YouTube- Congressional Candidate Lieutenant Colonel Allen West[/ame]
 
Last edited:
First off,I thought Health "reform" was suppose to lower insurance premiums....Not dramatically jack them up.

Second,if the Medicare eligibility age is lowered to 55....How in the hell are they going to "save" $400 billion by adding more people?

Presumably by killing off the over 65s.

this would be done by refusing them tests which may be necessary by refusing hospital facilities by refusing necessary drugs, by sharply limiting access to Doctors.
One way of doing this is to reduce the amount Medicare pays Doctors, Doctors would then feel compelled to refuse to accept any more medicare Patients.
There are a whole host of ways and means that could be carried out so as to limit Medicare costs.
 
I hope they pass this ****.... come 2012 there won't be a democrat left in office and more reasonable heads can vote all this crap out and get back to being the United States of America.
 
I hope they pass this ****.... come 2012 there won't be a democrat left in office and more reasonable heads can vote all this crap out and get back to being the United States of America.

When was the United States the nation of one party?
 
the 50 years after the civil war were pretty close

the solid dem south was defeated, occupied and reconstructed

probably more resistance confronted the gop in those decades from reformists within the party of lincoln than from disgraced and defeated dixiecrats without

mugwumps

it's from their principled position that teddy roosevelt arose

party leadership tried to waylay the bully boy, super popular governor of new york, in the veep's spot

teddy was accidental president, upon the assassination in buffalo of mckinley

teddy went bull moose, third party, in 12, ran against the northeastern elites in his own tent

opened the portal for wilson, only second donkey prez since lincoln

woodrow wilson was a virulent anti black racist

but we're getting far afield

back to what matters today---

obamacare was dealt deadly blows in mid december by cms accounting and byron dorgan's freeze over phrma

enjoy, please, a wonderful holiday

try to stay warm
 
the 50 years after the civil war were pretty close

the solid dem south was defeated, occupied and reconstructed

probably more resistance confronted the gop in those decades from reformists within the party of lincoln than from disgraced and defeated dixiecrats without

mugwumps

it's from their principled position that teddy roosevelt arose

party leadership tried to waylay the bully boy, super popular governor of new york, in the veep's spot

teddy was accidental president, upon the assassination in buffalo of mckinley

teddy went bull moose, third party, in 12, ran against the northeastern elites in his own tent

opened the portal for wilson, only second donkey prez since lincoln

woodrow wilson was a virulent anti black racist

but we're getting far afield

back to what matters today---

obamacare was dealt deadly blows in mid december by cms accounting and byron dorgan's freeze over phrma

enjoy, please, a wonderful holiday

try to stay warm

The Confederate Democrats are far from the same party of today's Democrats. Confederate Democrats held a very conservative political ideology.
 
princeton's prez, a paleo?

LOL!

wilson created the fed, ftc, war industries board and progressive income tax

he took over control of railroads and boisterously backed labor unions

his foreign policy was idealist internationalist as embodied in his 14 points and league of nations

do you think he was awarded his peace prize cuz of his old line views

but, again, too far afield

back to today---obamacare was dealt deadly blows in mid december by cms scoring and the dem's internecine phrma feud
 
princeton's prez, a paleo?

LOL!


but, again, too far afield

back to today---obamacare was dealt deadly blows in mid december by cms scoring and the dem's internecine phrma feud

How did this come about prof,care to explain?:confused:
 
Back
Top Bottom