Room For Healthcare Reform in President’s Budget: Analysts
Despite rhetoric that health care reform will need to wait until the economy improves, President Obama plans to push ahead in 2010 budget. And support for reform is more bipartisan than generally reported.
Those who thought Obama’s health care reform plans would have to wait until the economy recovers should think again. President Barack Obama made it clear during his news conference Tuesday that health care reform will begin with his 2010 budget, despite earlier beliefs by some health care policy experts that a steep deficit and floundering economy would delay the effort.
Obama said tackling entitlement programs like Medicare and the rising cost of health are necessary to help grow the economy in the long term and it can’t wait until the economy stabilizes.
“I’ve emphasized repeatedly what I expect out of this budget,” Obama told reporters during the prime time news conference. “I expect that there’s serious efforts at health care reform, and that we are driving down costs for families and businesses, and ultimately for the federal and state governments that are going to be broke if we continue on the current path.”
Including his initiatives in the budget would make it easier for them to become law. But industry experts expect Obama’s health reform proposals to face a tough fight in both the House and Senate to get a bipartisan law. Still, there are some proposals both Democrats and Republicans agree on that could set the stage for significant health care reform.
Changing how health care benefits are taxed is one example, said Robert Moffitt, director of the Center for Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. Currently, employees aren’t taxed on the health care benefits they receive through their employers while individuals pay with after tax dollars. Moffitt expects that Sen. Max Baucus’ (D-Mont.) proposal to tax employer benefits above a designated value would get Republican support and create a revenue resource to help low income American’s afford coverage.
“There’s a huge consensus among economists that the health tax treatment is unfair,” Moffitt said. “By putting a cap on the value of benefits, regardless of where you got it, we could use that revenue to expand coverage to people who don’t have it today. “
Two other areas Moffitt thinks both parties could agree is providing federal funding to promote state experimentation in financing the health care delivery system and bundling payments to hospitals for the treatment of certain illnesses such as heart attacks or strokes. Moffitt said Obama included the payment bundling proposal in his budget, but the President didn’t provide details on how to achieve it.
“The President’s objective is exactly right on this, assuming they can work out the details to get a performance based payment system,” Moffitt said.
CORNERSTONE SUPPORT, INC.
We are a true full-service compliance solution for state licensing, bonding and resident offices. Put Your Licensing & Renewals in Our Hands.
Care to Comment?
(Please read our comments policy first.)
Tell us what topics you're interested in and we'll keep you posted. Enter your email address below.
Related Resources
News
Analysis
Publications
Research
Products and Services
Comments
Comment from Joseph Macrina on March 27, 2009 at 12:24PM EST
Wake up America this Health Care plan is to form a SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM translation; Government Controlled Socialized Health Care. This same budget establishes a Health Care Czar and a Review Committee for Cost vs Treatment. If its costly and you are old you don't get. That is the Socialist Model that this program will follow. "Beware of strangers bearing gifts" There is no free lunch, but the LOW and NO income will get it and the rest will pay for it until the money runs out!
Comment from El Coyote on March 27, 2009 at 5:01PM EST
Mr. Liberal has stated, many times while campaigning that he wants to see people without health insurance have the same coverage that senators have which is essentially 100%. Well if you already have health insurance, which the vast majority of Americans do, believe it or not. You will see the homeless and the Mexicans getting Senator quality health coverage for free while you still have to pay for your inferior coverage. Good luck America. More change for you.
Comment from Anonymous on March 27, 2009 at 5:32PM EST
What's so bad about that?
Every other country in the world has Nationalized health care, EXCEPT ours.
And we sort of "stumbled" into the system we currently have.
We tried to allow employers to entice employees with these additional "benefits" packages, and thus as health care related services evolved from just seeing your town doctor to these monolithic health care "Delivery" systems our costs went up amazingly high, and are currently growing at something stupid like 12% a year.
Newer doesn't always equal better.
Older people don't need the stuff they get, most of the time. They're old. They're gonna die.
Young people need insurance against catastrophic illnesses, but if my 80 year old grandpa gets colon cancer, let him go already, his QALY (quality adjusted life years) he will have going through chemo, losing his hair, having 2 surgeries, or more, is actually probably NEGATIVE.
Review Cost of Treatment and Effectiveness, and subscribe to the REST OF THE WORLDS policies regarding effective treatments, and RATION it.
Its the only way folks. Hate to tell you, but if a 5 month old needs 1 million dollars worth of surgeries, he's 100x more likely to recover that expense throughout his lifetime of working, becoming (who knows) a doctor, whatever.
if an old person needs 1 million dollars worth of surgery, the costs to SOCIETY, and the REST OF US, are just too high.
if you have tons of money, and can afford to pay out of pocket for additional insurance and surgeries, live as long as you damn well please, you're probably the same person cussing about the socialized medicine, not even realizing if you have TONS OF MONEY, you can BUY TONS BETTER INSURANCE AND COVERAGE even within a socialized system.
You're just trying to scare us folks who are young and going into medical debt, so STOP it.
Comment from hsr0601 on March 29, 2009 at 11:09AM EST
I guess the best part of competition between the public and private insurance will be that it can bring down the excessive costs and raise the quality of service to survive particularly in private sector , therefore there is no need to worry about the expensive medical costs over time, as EUROPE tells it.
Thank You !
Comment from Anonymous on March 30, 2009 at 1:55PM EST
To the person who wrote: "What's so bad about that?
Every other country in the world has Nationalized health care, EXCEPT ours."
Have you ever spoken with anyone who lives in one of the European countries that have National Healthcare? I have and believe me when I tell you that it isn't working. The care is so sub-par that most comment that you never want to have to go to "hospiatl" because you are sure to get sicker once you get there. It is common place for women giving birth to get an infection - not to mention the fact that no Doctor is present. Your omly option is a Midwife.
People in Canada come to the US for treatment for curable cancers because they are refused treatment there.
And, you don't have to be old to get cancer. But according to your logic, if you are old you are not worth the expense so just go off and die.
For such a young person you have a cold calous heart. Let's hope that you never have to face a serious illness and be told that you are not worth the effort.
Comment from paybill on April 1, 2009 at 3:09PM EST
The first Anonymous poster is what is wrong with this country. Our country was built on values that are non Socialist, non European, free market and individual rights. Sometimes life isn't fair, it never will be, and your national healthcare won't change that even though you want it to. Doing what other countries won't or don't do is what has made our country the greatest place this earth has ever known. Now, because of people like Anonymous #1, we will be just like all the rest of the countries that aren't and haven't been as great and life as we know it will change forever. Mr. Obama and future leaders will now decide who lives and who dies. God help us all, were going to need it.