I highly recommend reading this new Reuters story on how useless Senator Kent Conrad’s (D-ND) idea of small, statewide co-ops would be. The story quotes several experts who all agree with what most of the progressive community has been saying for months: co-ops would be so legally restricted by Baucus’s bill that they would have little to no impact on health insurance in this country.
Analysts said the proposal sets the stage for multiple regional co-ops that would likely lack the leverage in negotiating rates to strongly compete against established players.
The co-ops would enroll individuals and small groups, rather than large businesses, also limiting their sway. The bill further appears to avoid giving the co-ops any special pricing power for their plans, analysts said.
Small, legally restricted, statewide co-ops are in no way a substitute for a real national public option.





38 Comments
Spotlight




Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Advanced search
Rallies Nationwide Tomorrow – Moveon + Allies – ‘Big Insurance: Sick of It’
And there is no ‘real national public option’ on the table, is there, so what is your point?
A ‘public option’ that is worth supporting and is politically on offer from the Democratic Party in control in DC now doesn’t exist, it is an empty casket.
for some unfathomable reason it is a big spooky taboo to say “Small, legally restricted, statewide co-ops are in no way a substitute for a
real national public optionSingle Payer plan, that treats health care as a human right.”O.T. just a little
I just heard that Orin Hatch introduced an amendment giving special treatment to states that have a U in their names? Are you fucking kidding me?
“Small, legally restricted, statewide co-ops are in no way a substitute for a real national public option.”
Is there a Witch Doctor in the house that takes cigarettes as payment?
Ok, I’ll throw in a shot of rum but that’s it.
Who is this Jon Walker and why is he front paging here? I’ve not noticed seminal posts before by him, nor comments in the threads, but all of the sudden since Sep 16th, POW! It’s Jon Walker!
I’m not being bitchy, I’m just curious.
You trying to encourage me to go into medicine? /s
sweetie that was snark on Keith’s part. he was making fun of both the futility and inanity of the garbage they are throwing against committee room walls in hopes or slowing down or further bolluxing up the process
Whew…. I was thinking WTF is really going on in that place.
yafkm – 707 o’ honery one
Actually, Hatch DID propose that amendment:
Hatch Amendment Raises Excise Tax Threshold “For Any State With A Name That Begins With The Letter ‘U’”
Tonight on the ED Show SEIU’s Andrew Stern said Coops are done, finished off the table.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30031533/
okay, so they are actually huffin’ the furniture polish
You’ve always been so kind, and never think ill of anyone. Remember, this is Orrin Hatch…! ((((cbl2)))
The cheap stuff.
Yep!
Wow, just wow. I don’t even know what to say.
right back at (((ya))) so kewl to see you here in the evening
regional co-ops don’t work, period. so far, of the ideas being seriously considered, only a public option with a falling premium price bar and the consequent threat of margin compromision on the private insurers (which pressure can be passed onto healthcare providers and pharmas), will have any shot at containing out of control costs. If we were to enact regional co-ops, cost growth will show no evidence of falling and in a few years some Rethug administration will sell them to BC/BS and nobody will even notice.
Speaking personally, I think that even something as manifestly unacceptable as a well constructed trigger would be better than regional co-ops.
Just wait! They haven’t even really started yet.
By October 15th the madness should rev up into totally HIGH gear, and I mean beyond huffing furniture polish.
Each co-op would needs millions of members. Even then everything I’ve read about them says it won’t work. I’ve read about disasterous consequences for regional co-ops as well. A few companies in the central coast of California tried it a few years back. Disaster is putting it mildly.
Completely and utterly OT, but if you’re a reformed smoker (like me) you might want to rush out and get a pack and take that last puff that you know you’re still craving because THE WORLD WILL END TONIGHT!!!!111!!! (Most of the folks who really, truly believe this shit were at the Value Voters Summit, their last shot at getting news coverage before they’re all snatched up to Heaven…)
Please do remind me to check the site that’s referred to by Pharyngula tomorrow… (snort)
Where’s their stuff? “g”
I’m thinkin’ you’re a good friend of Jon’s being funny – but since I was wrong on the whole “U” thing, might as well respond
Jon Walker blazed his way on to these pages with this beautiful piece of work:
Baucus Co Op Plan Authored by Ex Wellpoint VP – matches Mike Ross Blue Dog Amendment
pretty weedy stuff to detect and match as he did. and he hasn’t disappointed in any subsequent efforts. oh yeah, I’m a fan
God Bless PZ, LOL! What a hoot!
I think I’m going to start by checking some of my neighbors’ garages…!
Actually, Hatch DID propose that amendment:
Hatch Amendment Raises Excise Tax Threshold “For Any State With A Name That Begins With The Letter ‘U’”
I would have that that a pretty good joke, were it not for the fact that I saw Hatch at Teddy’s Memorial, and the man is so humor challenged that it not only seemed to hurt him, but kind of pained me, by sympathy, whenever the guy tried to muster a laugh. It honestly looke like it hurt him to try to muster/fake a laugh.
(Dear Orrin: the next time you’re looking for laughs, get the stick outta your ass first).
On Edit: Are there official Mormon ass-sticks?
even with millions of members, they’ll compete in only one market… while, through holding companies, private insurers will just out maneauver them, arbitraging out any localized cost containment effects. The key problem with the co-op concept is the word “regional” and that’s precisely why they’re being pushed by members of Congress owned by the insurers. I have no problems with a single, national public interest co-op with prices set by the government on a falling bar schedule… but then again, such a co-op would be functionally identical to a strong PO and possbly even a transition to a single payer system over time… once prices come into check. It’s the “regional” and the “small” that exposes these co-ops for what they are – insurance company shadow play.
Thanks. Was truly just curious. Donita Sparks goes, Mike Stark appears, Jon Walker blazes; It’s the way blogs go, but was curious where Jon came from.
yeah, but he plays guitar so well….
It has been there for such a long period of time, it has become stuck. Perhaps surgical intervention would assist his challenging situation.
Stick? I thought Orrin was walking around with a potato chip up there, and trying not to break it.
I’d prefer to not think of the nature of the stick… all I know is that when Hatch “laughed” at the Teddy Memorial, it made me kind of simultaneously sad and sick. What a pathetic excuse for a human being.
I found myself longing for Chuck Barris’s Gong Show Hook.
Sniff*
I still miss Donita.
Hey I’ve been running my own website (The Walker Report) on politics and policy (mainly health care policy) for over a year now. I was asked because of my writing on that site to start writing here on FDL. I hope you all enjoy.
Co-Ops must have some potential or they wouldn’t
put all those restrictions on them in the bill.
I kinda like the idea of a regional Co-Op owned by the residents.
The insurance companies don’t want to take any chances. Their are two small relatively well function quasi-coop health insurance companies left. That is two more than the for-profit insurance companies want.
Wide open competition with good regulation will work much better than a co-op. A national market.
Obama says on Sunday, “premiums went up by 5.5% in the last year,” like insurance premiums rise in some vacuum. Better to say the cost of health care services went up by 5.5 %, then you are framing the real problem.
The problem of turn downs, pre-existing conditions, etc. can all be solved by some new rules, but none of that will do anything to lower the skyrocketing costs of health care. AND, Obama says that if the costs are not brought down that Medicare will run higher and higher deficits. That is another way of saying that Medicare itself cannot do anything about the rising costs, which also means a public option certainly won’t be able to do any better.
What does that mean? That with a public option you might get a one time lowering of PREMIUMS by some percentage, but after that, we back off to the races. Because, if Medicare, with its bargaining power and leverage, according to Obama, can’t halt the rise in costs, the public option, with even less power won’t be able to do it either.
I have not heard anyone come up with a credible explanation for the rise in health care service costs. That to me is the nitty gritty that must be drilled down to.
Again, these are details and logistics that have not been very well thought out.