If only Senator Rockefeller was the Chair of the Finance Committee……..

A United States Senator, who is second in seniority on the majority side of the committee of jurisdiction for a high-visibility, historic, vitally-important legislative policy that will affect every American, a matter that is overseen in large part by the health care subcommittee he chairs “[has] no idea who put the bill together” that his committee Chairman publicly proffered…

Are there words to describe this travesty of illicit procedure and process?

Meanwhile, we, the “governed” out here in the hinterland, are supposed to be able to discern, and thereby “consent” (or not) to what our federal representatives are doing in our names inside the back rooms of D.C., even though the plugged-in insiders are apparently openly admitting that secretive, unnamed interests and persons have taken their place and soundlessly stolen the jurisdiction of their elective public office?!?

I appreciate that Rockefeller said what he said, because that admission from him at this late date exposes something so fundamentally corrupt and outrageous – even assuming that the Obama White House has been interfering in the affairs of his committee from day one, behind a shield of plausible deniability and omerta helpfully maintained by Reid and Baucus (at least) – that its implications are truly breathtaking.

Yes, but we know that a former VP of WellPoint, Liz Fowler, put together this odious crap of a health insurance bailout bill. The better question might be why doesn’t Rockefeller know about that?

He knows it alright. He’s just not going to say it.

Max Baucus isn’t really a Democrat, is he?

That’s what I’ve learned this summer.

Democrat? Republican? It’s all just becoming a moot point.

If those office walls could talk! Try to imagine the crap that Baucus TRIED to stick in there, but as an after thought, figured out it was JUST TOO OBVIOUS!

To some congresscritters I don’t think party affiliation means any thing at all
Maybe party of the almighty dollar might fit

Apparently due to existing federal law, large companies can call themselves “self-insurers” even though they provide coverage through a major insurance company.

Companies with self-insurance programs contract with a major insurance company to administer the program (i.e. process the paperwork) according to the rules the major company — not the insurance company — sets up. The insurer gets a management fee, but does not set the rules for those who are insured in this plan and gets no profits if claims are less than projected nor face any losses if claims are more than projected.

Self-insurance basically means the large company assumes all the risk themselves. In some cases, this was done to protect companies and workers from what was seen as a monopolistic health care market in a given state. The companies and workers bailed on the insurance company rules and rate hikes, setting up their own system instead and contracting out the management of it to the traditional insurance company.

Don’t get me wrong — I think Rockefeller is doing the right thing. But let’s be clear about what a self-insurance program is. It’s not an insurance company ploy.

Thanks, Peterr!

This suggests to me that there are some large companies who self-insure, who sent a lobbyist to chat with Baucus who said “Sure — go after Teh Evil Insurance Companies, but could you slip this little thing in there so we aren’t affected?”

Would love to see a list of major companies who self-insure.

imho all insurance companys can claim to be self insured just by definition. After all the Big Boys assume all the risk now.( except the risks they avoid by recission and pre-existing conditions of course) It would all come down to how they parse the weasel words.

Gee, I’m “surprised”!!

Amazing what gets into a Bill when THE LOBBYISTS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES – WRITE THE BILL!!!!!

Baucus says that the narrative and legislative language of the amendments will be posted on the Senate Finance Committee website. I hope we have some folks looking to make sure that the legislative language doesn’t create loopholes.

Here’s the problem with companies that self-insure. They get private health information about their employees, which they can use to discriminate in promotions, raises, or layoffs.

Hell I wish he was majority leader.

” Rockefeller adding that Baucus is ”receiving about 500 bits of information a minute… He’s very, very busy, I understand that, but this is a very, very big problem.”

Assuming he is using Vista 64, that is 7.8 characters a min.

Having trouble being overloaded with one word a minute?

When Jello Jay is championed for rushing in at the last moment to simply enforce the most basic reform promises we’ve been assured of all along… and moves the date of said reform from 2018 to 2013…. you know we are totally screwed.

The entire nation should be discussing and implementing our reduction in costs of 30 percent or more along with our great dental and vision coverage in the next 24 months.

But all discussion is about convoluted protection of insurance… assured soaring prices…. with reform far into the future… and real care seemingly further away.

A lot of attention is focussed on Baucus and away from the White House where clarity and leadership have so far not been the hallmarks of the current president. Baucus is the designated lightning rod in the health care faux reform kabuki sideshow to the main monkey business, viz., getting hands on as much taxpayer monies as possible, stat. Does Baucus really want the onus of being the person who single-handedly created a health care catastrophe? Stay tuned.

Baucus says that the narrative and legislative language of the amendments will be posted on the Senate Finance Committee website. I hope we have some folks looking to make sure that the legislative language doesn’t create loopholes.

*
I heard today that there is an amendment to prevent the public from reading the content of the bills and amendments. That only the lobbyists will be able to read anything but a summary. I can’t remember if I heard it as a news item or just on talk radio, though.

It was about this Roberts proposal I guess:

http://campaignsilo.firedoglak…..-to-lobby/

If a taxpayer would be allowed to simply write “self insured” on their tax form, and not be required to either purchase junk insurance or pay a fine, I would be ok with that, but I doubt if that will be the case. This entire “reform” is just an attempt to transfer costs from business to the individual, while preserving insurance industry and pharmacutical profits – the reason for the mandate.

I think the Baucus bill will end up a good one once the smoke clears.
People clamor for coverage but don’t want to pay even a fraction of the cost. Why should businesses have to pay the cost?

Corporate self-insurance is no small thing. Many large companies use that scheme. Theoretically, it controls profits owed to insurers, while allowing companies to insulate themselves by having an unrelated third-party formally administer their sponsored health plans. It’s a three-way arrangement that amounts to cost-plus contracting, well-known in the defense contractor realm.

It works like this. The insurer administers the company-approved health plan in the “normal” insurer way. The employees’ health insurance relationship is exclusively with the insurer, not the employer. The trick is that all agreed liabilities incurred under the plan – “medical losses” (health care), plus an agreed service fee that both sides understand covers administrative costs plus insurer’s profits – are passed through by the insurer to the company. Adjustments are made annually or more often for various “savings measures”.

The insurer’s risk is managing its administrative cost so as to keep profits high. But it gets a benny when it helps lower health care costs, too (via “savings measures”), an incentive directly at odds with providing health care to employees and which assumes a typical adversarial relationship between employer and employee, but one the employer can cosmetically lay off on the insurer.

For public regulatory purposes, it is the insurer’s, not the employer’s, obligation to administer and make payments as provided in the company-sponsored plan (which are then passed through to the employer, plus a fee). In exchange, the company pays lower rates than if that risk were truly on the insurer’s shoulders.

The company internalizes the risks associated with the cost of health care. The employer manages its health care costs by determining the fullness of the coverage it provides, by using carrots and sticks with employees to remain healthier, and through its hiring and firing practices.

Hiring and firing practices are thus distanced from the costs they impact. That allows large employers – who look at such things as statistical challenges rather than relational ones – to avoid the appearance of making hiring/firing decisions for illegal reasons, such as age or race discrimination. It seems unlikely that this schema is unrelated to pervasive practices such as hiring young and inexperienced employees; riffing older, more experienced and expensive workers; and using a plethora of screening tools, such as credit history, psychological tests and other behavioral clues. (All of which ignores outsourcing.)

If Baucus’ bill treats those covered by such plans differently and less advantageously, it’s a suitcase full of 50,000 dollar bills thrown to big business. Odds are, they will show their gratitude in the usual way.

A former neighbor worked for a self-insured company. He was injured in a vehicle accident while hauling, at his superiors express orders, a piece of equipment. When the weight of the equipment, started pushing the vehicle into opposing traffice, the neighbor chose to aim for the shoulder and the highway was closed for an hour or so to deal with the accident. His obvious injuries were covered, but when he started getting seizures three years later, which all the doctors attributed to the accident, the self-insured company wouldn’t pay. They moved out of their home into a rental. Finally, members of a larger congregation of their faith, took a collection to pay off the bills. That is exactly what Rockefeller is worried about.

Why look to Sen. Max Baucus for any improvement in the average 13% increase in health insurance premiums over the last ten years? His markup protects the current outrageous profits of the health insurance companies, and the mandate (everyone has to pay or play) just makes a pool of previously uninsured clients available to be billed. I’m disgusted with the June “secret deals” and the lobbyist written bills. The constituents seem to be always on the short end of the stick.

If this healthcrap gets passed the whole U.S. well go broke just like mass and calif is. Dont know where you lost your heads but GOD help us all if this welfare goes through

This is the Save Walmart clause of the bill. Walmart is a huge self insurer.