From The Hill we learned that Mike Ross (D-Ark) sent a letter to his constituents praising the Baucus bill.
Ross used most of the letter to strongly endorse Conrad’s small, state-based co-ops idea. This should surprise no one given the overwhelming evidence that Ross has been working directly and/or indirectly with Conrad to get the co-ops idea included in the House bill. The letter reads:
Last week, the Senate Finance Committee unveiled its health care reform bill – the fifth version of health care reform presented on Capitol Hill. The controversial government-run public option is not included. In its place is a uniquely (and familiar) American proposal – a co-op. Co-ops have been around for years and not just in health care. Many of you are probably familiar with electrical co-ops and farmers’ co-ops. As a nonprofit, member-owned group, a health care co-op would operate similarly in that they are controlled by their members, who actively participate in setting policies and making decisions, and a member-elected governance board. And, unlike private companies where voting power is based on the number of shares you own, each member gets one equal vote.
Membership would be completely voluntary and open to any individual or family interested. The co-ops could operate on state or regional levels and startup money would most likely come from the federal government through grants or loans.
(emphasis mine)
It is too bad that Congressman Ross used his letter to mislead his constituents about the co-ops idea. Membership with in fact not be open to “any individual or family interested.” According to Baucus’s Mark “CO-OP grantees would compete in the reformed individual and small group insurance markets.” Therefore the co-ops would not be an option for “any individual or family interested,” but would be restricted to only accepting memberships from a very small segment of the population.
Ross Admits the some experts believe a “co-op would need at least 500,000 members in order to succeed.” Given that Arkansas has just under 3 million people and the strong restrictions placed on co-op membership, it would be nearly impossible for an Arkansas statewide co-op to ever get enough members to be viable.
11 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
Well, it’s good to see Mike Ross take a clear position now, so that we can see how far he moves off it when the FDL Action advertisements start.
No they aren’t. There are co-ops in many parts of the world…Indian women use financial coops to make loans to one another. People pool their money to buy a collectively used tractor. Coops are as ancient as human social units. But there are also CORPORATE Co-Ops…such as the National Milk Board, etc. These fix prices, develop production targets, etc.
He’s trying to make it sound all cuddley. Like a food Co-Op or farmers market. The problem is that co-ops often fail. They get manipulated by their suppliers, or can’t offer competitive prices. The big guns are always shooting for them b/c they are usually the weakest competitor in the market.
Food co-ops work because the members can contribute to aspects of the operation to reduce cost…”sweat equity”. But do you want a volunteer handling the Stat on a surgery? Handling personal documents relating to you, or your families, health issues?
The only Health co-op in Arkansas utterly failed less than 5 years after it formed. It had about 500 members, was heavily dependant on Federal aid and experimental seed grants, and when those ran out it died. There is no evidence that it reduced health care costs, even locally.
Now if there was a NATIONAL, subsidized (at least for administrative and start-up/organizational costs) Co-Op this might be a different story. Only a freely available system would have the power to negotiate for plans that would be diverse enough to fulfill the different needs of members.
politely urging all firedogs to read the whole ‘letter to constituents’ link – lie upon lie, upon lie
I spotlighted the post to Arkansas Dem Gazette staff – and included Senator Rockefeller’s reality based refutation for their perusal – along with some “aggressive strategist”’s take down on Rachel’s show
wake the fuck up and smell the perfidy Arkansas
I wonder how Ross responds when someone points out the mathematics to him? I’m sure the patter will be fully circular in logic and reasoning going ever in circles while saying nothing.
Don’t forget, we’re already seeing the Baucus Co-Op Bill’s beta test in Massachusetts — where it’s called “RomneyCare”, hasn’t done much to extend health care (especially quality health care), and costs much, much more than what existed before.
I believe Romneycare had a public option component, apparently an adaptation of the Hacker model. The main feature of Romneycare, however, is the mandatory insurance component advanced enthusiastically by Newt Gingrich.
Those Blue Dogs bare an uncanny resemblance to the Donnie Darko Bunny.
I hope that FDL follows through and helps support a more progressive opponent to challenge Ross in a primary fight. His response is out of step with what Americans consistently say they want in healthcare reform. I’m willing to bet that the stats in Arkansas aren’t that much different than national numbers. If so, Ross may have just stepped in deep doo doo. If FDL and other groups help Dem opponents, Ross is going to be frantically scrapping off his shoes for the next 6 months or so.
Where’d they go? Mine just now vanished. [You can still see them in the feed, though.]
But then, they were reminding me of something else …
From Canada ….
I use a pet food co-op in my neighbourhood & they have just started a people food (cute) co-op across the street.
So there, Mr. Mike Ross.
I’ve heard the Mass plan is something of a failure on cost control. What was wrong with it or missing that was (obviously) needed for cost control?
Why did it fail?