PRES. OBAMA’S REQUIREMENTS
As theoretical proposals go, the Obama-Biden guideline lays solid groundwork for any subsequent reform bills; it contains both Democratic and Republican suggestions and offers possible funding sources.
This hypothetical bill would improve the coverage of those who already have insurance, and also make it available to those who don’t. Ideally, it also must keep future costs to a minimum while decreasing the current costs of health care.
Two of the most prominent proposals are those of the Senate Financial Committee and the House Tri-Committee ‘mdash; a less palatable option thanks to its deficit-widening price.
THE PRICEY HOUSE PLAN
Earlier this month, President Obama famously declared that he would ‘not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits’ ‘mdash; bad news for the Democrats behind America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, also known as HR 3200. This plan proposes a $1.5 trillion overhaul of the health-care system over a 10-year period and, in the process, would add $239 billion to the federal debt.
As one of the earliest proposals on the health-care table, HR 3200 adheres very closely to Obama’s requirements: It penalizes those without insurance and offers coverage for preventative procedures like checkups.
Because it follows the president’s guidelines so closely and has such high predicted costs, however, Republicans stamped this bill as a liberal creation. Without the essential bipartisan support that would have made it a viable option, it has largely faded from the public eye ‘mdash; and given the fact that it would expand our federal deficit, which other plans allegedly will not, it’s not the most desirable option, either.
THE BAUCUS PLAN
The current health-reform proposal that has everybody’s panties in a twist is the ‘America’s Healthy Future Act,’ as proposed by Senator Max Baucus (D ‘- Montana) and the Senate Finance Committee. While the plan is the closest proposal to actual bipartisan legislation, issues with its allocation of funds (and proposed sources of revenue) mean that there’s something for senators on both sides of the aisle to dislike.
Plus, the plan’s relatively low price of $856 billion (compared to the House’s proposed $1.5 trillion) has some major drawbacks. Though all individuals will be required to have some form of coverage, in accordance with Obama’s wishes, the bill offers only $458 billion to subsidize low-income families, as opposed to the House bill’s $773 billion. This allows conservatives across the board to paint mandatory health care as a costly burden to the average working family. Meanwhile, its lack of a public- health option frustrates liberals and makes it unlikely to be signed into law as is.
While the Baucus plan is a good first step to necessary compromise, it also makes the fatal error of trying to please everybody, with the end result of pleasing nobody.
‘mdash; Hayley Bisceglia-Martin Staff Writer