Jonathan Cohn is trying to defend the individual mandate in this bill by claiming the Netherlands also has an individual mandate. The problem is the health care system produced by the Senate bill would be nothing at all like the health system in the Netherlands. I have long maintained the progressives should accept an individual mandate only as part of a broad social contract with the government guaranteeing everyone access to quality, affordable health insurance. This is what the Netherlands does, and this is what the Senate bill does not. The Senate’s version will only be a rusted out hull shaped to kind of look like a working health care system from a distance.
This bill is a sham BS imitation of a true universal health care systems built on the government guarantee of access to quality, affordable health insurance and an individual mandate. Countries like the Netherlands have important regulations ensuring all their citizens have access to quality, affordable health insurance, regulations that are completely lacking in this bill. Things such as:
| Dutch Health Care System | Senate Bill |
| True community ratings where everyone is charged the same premiums | Very large age rating ratios that allow insurance companies to charge old people three times as much as the young |
| The government mandates only the sale of strictly defined high quality insurances and all basic policies must have identical coverage rules | Gives insurers wide latitude in design policies and allows for the sale of very low 60% actuarial junk insurance and “catastrophic plans” |
| Premiums are very affordable (roughly €100 a month for basic coverage) | People will be force to pay 9.8% of their income for a low value insurance plan |
| Extremely strong national regulator | Basically no direct national regulator |
| Deductible of €150 | No maximum deductible but based on 70% actuarial values the deductible should be well over a thousand dollars for most silver plans |
| Extremely robust risk adjustment mechanisms that force insurers to compete based on quality and not risk selection | Weak risk adjuster that would not stop insurers from trying to game the system and cherry pick customers |
| Achieves near universal coverage with 98.5% of people in the country covered | Achieves only 93%-94% coverage |
| Allows for drug re-importation to keep drug prices low | Not permitted |
| Central government provider negotiator for most procedures | No central provider negotiator |
Listed here are only some of the ways the system produced by the Senate bill falls way short of the Dutch health care system. If the government promised everyone access to well regulated, high quality insurance with a $200 deductible and monthly premiums of $150, I would definitely be supporting the individual mandate. The problem is that the Senate bill will force people to buy extremely expensive poorly regulated junk insurance. The individual mandate is morally and politically wrong until the government lives up to its end of the social contract. On that front, the Senate bill is a failure.
The system produced by the Senate bill from a distance vaguely resembles the Dutch system. Just like an old rusted out car looks like a new BMW when seen from an airplane. It is when you get up close and look under the hood that you see one is an unworkable pile of rust.




80 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Dirty Joe Must Go!
Dirty Joe Must Go!
Everybody now– Dirty Joe Must Go!
I think I just need to copy this into a notepad and keep it so I can cut and paste it:
1. Kill the ‘Bill’
2. Enact Medicare for all via reconcilliation
3. Apply our FICA taxes to a premium credit
4. Disband all Government programs and convert them to Medicare
5. Watch the insurance companies reform themselves w/o legislation
Excellent post, Jon! I’m just curious what your source material was for putting together the Dutch side of your comparison table.
A fair amount came from the Dutch ministry on health http://www.minvws.nl/en/themes/health-insurance-system/default.asp
Kill the bill or remove the mandate!
If there is a mandate without a massive public option, I will vote for whoever campaigns on repealing it unless its the liar Obamsa who made the fricking thing!
oh and on a side note, when is ed shults gonna start pushing the removal of the mandate? He has not brought this up to one senator!
jan schakowsky was just on and she said this bill will cover 30 million more people and ed just said ya it will, wtf is that?
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Jon. I am confident most liberals would gladly trade a “public option” for the kind of “robust” regulatory environments present in the Netherlands and Switzerland. What those (I’m talking about you, Rahm) who claim we are “obsessed” with the PO don’t understand is that what we are truly obsessed about is high-quality, low-cost care. With the weak Baucus-style regulations we currently have, a PO is necessary to indirectly “regulate” the market. Give me real rules for Anthem, and I’d gladly participate in this kind of scheme.
It might be very instructive to Americans who believe THEY have the best health care system in the world to view a comparison chart such as the one in this piece – one for all the countries which have universal care. Also, showing the mortality and other health indicator rates for those countries.
Colored Pie charts might break through tea-bagged eyes.
I’ve read stuff about the Dutch (and British and Canadian and German and French) systems written by people who live in those countries.
They’re doing a lot better at it than we are.
And the people who keep telling how bad those systems are, are lying through their teeth (and probably have better insurance than any of us will ever be able to afford).
Am I incorrect that “co-pays” are also outlawed in the Netherlands?
Average doctor salary in the Netherlands is 72% of average US doctor.
That 28% savings could come in handy.
Cohn and the others can put their tulips together and kiss my soon to be bankrupted by mandate ass
@alan1tx, totally agree. A third rail of the recent debate seems to be even suggesting that our doctors are overpaid.
Another observation about the Dutch system: KISS. Keep it simple, stupid. The new “Emanuel” plan could never be described as simply as the Dutch plan. They get a simple, logical and socially just plan. We get a Harry Potter novel…
I’ll bet medical school tuitions in the Netherlands are not as expensive as in the U.S.
Thanks John Walker!
We need to cut through al the bull and bring as much clarity on this issue as possible.
Effin’ socialists what makes ‘em think that people want to be healthy? I want the freedom to be sick and die without gummint interfearance.
This is what I’ve been saying for days, now: Without REAL REGULATION and PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THAT HURT, Mandates are just a giveaway to powerful corporations armed with teams of people whose sole focus is to continue to deny claims, rescind coverage, and otherwise make things hard on their “customers” in the name of preserving profits.
I have yet to get an answer as to the scope of the regulations in the Senate bill, even from my Senator’s office, which I called yesterday.
If the regs are as great as the ones for Wall Street or Enron, well, then, I bet the Insurance Industry is just as happy as they can be, because they will just continue on as they have and pay the fines as they come up.
No, they’re not. You’re right, we should be subsidizing the medical school tuition of students willing to work as general practitioners. Someday when we get REAL reform, we’ll need the extra capacity in the system.
It’s not a question of subsidizing the current costs. It’s a question of cutting costs.
Come and try to carrying me away mofo’s… I AM NOT PAYING YOUR MANDATE…FOR ANY REASON!
Good point, the doctors AND the medical schools are both ripping us off.
The 2006 population in Holland is ca 6,000,000. If they can pull this off, why can’t Connecticut or perhaps New England manage something like this. The areas might be broken down by Federal Reserve district.
don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining
common refrain in my head these days.
Occam’s razor at work.
What a brilliant idea. Use Occam’s razor to cut costs. It’s sharp enough.
Connecticut is working on something that may not be entirely similar, but certainly rhymes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SustiNet.
It’s called Sustinet.
Eureka , or Satori, either way; excellent point. California should put it up to a referendum!
I’m OK with 1, 2, & 3.
RECOMMEND:
Amend 4 as follows: All existing state and federal government health programs, except those administered or operated by the Veteran’s Department shall be incorporated into Medicare.
Eliminate 5 because it’s unnecessary.
joe did obama’s work, this is the bill obama wanted in the first place and obama didn’t fight for anything till this bill was written
this is entirely obama’s fault
Yes, the bill is less than wonderful. But if it goes down, we will have a repeat of 1994. We all know how spineless congressional dems are: one big loss and they’ll refuse to move on anything else of consequence.
And, you know, I don’t remember anybody complaining about the lack of a public option in Massachusetts’ reform. You know, the one with an individual mandate?
Excellent. Let’s have some facts to compare. How about Switzerland? Do they have individual mandates?
I think you are not alone. If this forced purchase of crappy insurance from these cutthroats with no oversight passes I believe we are in for some big time civil disobedience. Maybe this is what is needed to wake this country up to see this country is now and has been for some time run by the corps and for the corps.
Thanks for the link Jon, reviewed several of the documents. What really struck me was the simplicity of the Netherlands medical system. I was especially impressed with the core facet of patient care focus on their system.
Out of curiosity I googled medical malpractive, and did not find anything relevant for Netherlands.
Maybe its hindsight, but if our Congress (was honest..), they could have spelled in a simple way the paradigm shift of our healtcare structure it would have had great appeal? Thoughts?
Massachusetts has a much higher rate of employer insurance than the country as a whole, making the mandate less onerous. And yes, if you’ve been here awhile, selise has been very analytically critical of the MA plan. And, although I’m not up on the results, I think the MA plan is costing a lot more than the estimates.
Imagine what will happen to the Ds in 2010 if the senate bill gets passed and voters figure out what a piece of shit it is.
When you decide to put in a mandate that will force people to spend 10k a yr that they do not have, you already conceded 2010 and 2012.
Not to discredit your efforts, but googling in Dutch may yield different results.
The Europeans in general do not resort to torts as much anyway.
Something in the Constitution about armed revolt for offences such as corporate crime. Must be Diebold did give Bush another term. What else could it be??????????????????????????????????????????
whats next from obama, mandating everyone in the country has to buy a house and own no less then 3 cars?
This is exactly why Obama & Rahm wanted to delay the effective date of the legislation until after the 2012 election.
We will only have a repeat of 1994 if we talk about it as a defeat instead of a setback. If it is a setback, we will have specific politicians up for election in 2010 at whose feet to lay it. And that includes all Republicans. Some strong progressive candidates in supposedly Republican districts (all 177 of them) could make a difference in the Democratic caucus in the House. That doesn’t mean that we will get many seats that way, but it does mean that we might offset losses of Blue Dogs. And the issue is “obstruction of everything”; MIA in governance and deliberation.
We could have a repeat of Newtie’s “shut down the government” gambit if we can get the narrative right.
1994 was more about NAFTA than health care reform.
And as for Mass., I don’t live there, but when I heard about it, my very first reaction was outrage that a government could mandate you buy private insurance without offering a real alternative.
I thought they were fond of desserts.
Didn’t candidate Obama promise us healthcare as good as what congress has? This sounds nothing like what congress has. Oh well, what the hell, another campaign promise broken. Gonna renegotiate NAFTA, gonna put an end to mountain top mining, gonna create millions of green jobs, gonna get out of Iraq, gonna fix infrastructure, yes we can, blah, blah,blah. I am ashamed I was so easily taken in; at my age!
This bill doesn’t do one goddamn thing for me. If I wanted to spend 12 grand a year and bankrupt myself I would have already done it.
Hey eCAHN here’s a link to a study done on the Massachusetts plan ,I just started reading it myself
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/massachusetts_health_reform_ar.php
The problem is the health care system produced by the Senate bill would be nothing at all like the health system in the Netherlands.
Yeah? So? What’s the problem?
Righto. Good point.
Still, there will be some coverage of what it will cost, insurance corps, docs, hospitals, etc. will all raise prices as much as possible between now & then, and people who think the plan will save them will be pissed at the delay in the startdate. Either way, I think its not a winner for them.
snark
Dr. Dean is, was correct!! I knew Senator Landrieu was a lier.
lol, good point!
effects of NAFTA (thank you Clinton!)
“…it is clear that the costs to workers outweighed the benefits in all three nations. The process differed from country to country, and given the greater size and wealth of the United States, the impact there has not been as great as it was in Mexico and Canada. But the overall pattern was similar. In each nation, workers’ share of the gains from rising productivity fell and the proportion of income and wealth going to those at the very top of the economic pyramid grew.”
I submit:
1. Reconciliation with NO public option.
2. Medicare buy-in to 55.
3. Maintain mandate with draconian regulation of industry (i.e. 95 percent MLR, caps on premiums for ALL citizens, no caps on coverage, increased subsidies, federal negotiation of drug prices, no age discrimination and real prohibitions on cherry-picking customers.)
4. Penalties with “teeth” imposed on insurers that may be inclined to break the rules with sufficient funding for enforcement.
In the end, we get real health care reform that improves access and quality and lowers costs. Moderates are happy that government is not getting “into the business” of health care. Tea Partiers can’t use “public option rhetoric” to screw us in 2010.
UPDATE: I suppose it would be impossible to impose all these new regulatory features during reconciliation, but it seems like some of them could be justified as deficit reducing.
yes he dis. “The same insurance we have.” That’s what he used to say.
Looks like a great source. I’ve saved the link for a thorough read later. Thanks.
Harry Potter novel.
LOL
I’m sorry you had to make this argument. Since it’s necessary, do it louder. This Senate bill does not promote anything like the systems that work so well in France and The Netherlands, or in the developed world outside the US, from Japan to Canada to Holland.
A small example, from your chart. Only 1.5% of Dutch citizens are not covered. That’s just shy of 250,000 people out of about 16.5 million. If 7% of Americans are not covered, that’s over 21.5 million people uninsured. That’s 25% more than the total Dutch population. It’s nearly twice the population of greater Paris and three times the population of greater London.
That figure doesn’t count the tens of millions of underinsured Americans, who can’t afford to use their insurance. Nor does it count the Americans whose claims are denied, or paid months or years late, or the people whose insurance is rescinded. Those uniquely American health insurance practices – strangely legal here – add billions to the annual medical bill and a similar amount in profits to the industry.
The biggest difference, as you point out, is that the Dutch system is about providing medical care to its citizens and how to do so at a low or reasonable cost. Here, the medical payments administrator has mutinied and taken over the ship. It runs it to maximize its own profits, not to deliver the medical goods.
Link?
Yes, this isn’t nearly as good a situation as in Mass. And maybe I’m just too focused on my own experience of having been on the individual insurance “market” for years and how much I would have loved a subsidy. And frankly, eliminating rescissions and denial for preexisting conditions is enough to justify all the rest of the bill.
Oh, and if people do start screaming over the next several months (after passage) about “what a piece of shit it is” maybe we’ll get a reconciliation bill to improve the subsidies (and while that may be a pipe dream, it’s not 100% impossible–just 95% or so).
Et voila: Economic Policy Institute:
http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/bp173/
Bullshit. Go look up the penalty for not getting insurance. Seriously, look it up.
I hope it works for you. Not optimistic though.
Great source. Thanks. I’ve bookmarked it.
oh so obama is a good guy for giving us the option to either pay a penalty or do jail time if we cant cough up 10k for our family of 4 when we are struggling to make rent on our 55k a yr income?
maybe we can just ask for our ear to be chopped off as a barter?
The U.S. under either the Republicans or Democrats aspires to nothing more than a 2nd class country. Traveling to Europe on a regular basis to visit family and friends it’s painfully obvious that Europeans are surpassing the U.S. in so many areas, poltical, social, economic, cultural…………..
heh, but you’ll still have a kidney to barter away should you need it for serious Health related emergencies.
For Obamapologists all’s good all the time.
political, social and cultural has always been a given, but economic?! Anyway, who gives a fuck, we’ve still got the biggest fucking stick on the block, so there.
Great post. One tweak: #4 should read “Disband the Defense Department and convert it to Medicare”
Increasing the number of progressives in Congress, however it is done, has to be the top priority. Merely electing Democrats, or people who are “less conservative” isn’t good enough. Numbers talk, and progressives are badly outnumbered in Congress.
You could cut the defense budget by about a third and pay for all of this, if I remember all the costs that have been bandied about correctly.
And when a majority of people opt to pay the penalty instead, pissing off the insurance companies…
What do you think will happen?
Cut defense by a third!? What would we do when the rest of the world bands together and attacks?
They’ll change the penalty to a jail term.
One option to achieve this would be to close bases outside of US, as well as get our of Afganistan. I recall the number of US bases being 500-700 range..
The media spin on this bill is nothing but bovine scatology. You can call a pile of cow sh*t a meadow muffin or a cow pie … it’s still a big pile of cow sh*t. You can put lipstick on a pig and it’s still a pig. The white house is peeing on my leg and telling me it’s raining every time they say “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”. I know manure and urine when I see it and that’s what this bill is. Don’t treat your constituents like fools and idiots. We read the bill and we understand what we read.
PS: I think we should all pile up some cow manure in muffin cups and send them to the white house labled “Christmas Meadow Muffins”.
Excellent list, or, as they say in the Netherlands, Dat was uitstekend!
Once again I’ll link to the circular Jon pointed us to a while ago, describing the Dutch risk adjustment mechanism in plain terms: here.
Jon’s examples can be replicated ad nauseum in other countries with private insurance. In Switzerland, for instance, a customer is forgiven the next month’s premium if a doctor-certified claim isn’t paid in a matter of days. Can you imagine such a law being enacted here? This is why the only path to reform for our nation is to bypass the private sector, which will never reform itself.
Same goes for the House bill.
Look our system sucks, its bad, its broken. This Senate Bill is a dog pile that smells really bad, the Republicans aren’t even involved, somebody keeps asking what do they think, WHO GIVES A FUCK what they think, they aren’t the ones trying to sell a dog pile bill, the Dems are!
So with that said and knowing nothing worth talking about will come out of this without some 11th hour heroics, I say if you can afford to leave and want real health care, good education and country not committed to unjustified wars – Become an EXPAT
Translation: That was excellent.
What is this? How does it work?
How is this different from the ‘national regulator’? So the government negotiates prices for most things with providers on behalf of insurers and patients? And is that how it works in Germany too?
No. For the framework of how reimbursement is handled is given by the federal government.
But how much reimbursement is paid is negotiated on state level between the associations of insurers (both public and private) on one side and the associations of physicians, hospitals, and dentists on the other side.
Jon Walker needs to publish a book I guess. Keith Olbermann featured Cohn last night with nary a nod to the counter arguments out there.
MEMO TO ALL FDL COMMENTORS!
Don’t you think we could all pitch in and get ads with Jon’s charts printed in the WSJ and USA Today?
How ’bout it Jane, think you could arrange an e-mail to all of us to get this done pronto?