Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) sees a (centrist) compromise on Senate health bill

[bigtree]

from the Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/67413-conrad-describes-outline-of-a-compromise-on-senate-health-bill


11/11/09 04:40 PM ET

The "outline of a compromise" is beginning to emerge in the Senate on health reform legislation, a top Democratic member said Wednesday.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) described the contours of a compromise health bill he said would probably come to the Senate floor next week.

"I think you can begin to see the outlines of a compromise," Conrad told MinnPost and the Grand Forks Herald.

The compromise, the centrist chairman of the Budget Committee said, would include a public option not tied to Medicare reimbursement rates alongside the nonprofit cooperative model established in the Senate Finance Committee's bill, which Conrad had played a key role in crafting.

"I think public option will be included as an alternative (in the final bill), but not tied to Medicare levels of reimbursement," Conrad said in preview of that legislation. "And there will be a not-for-profit alternative, and that will be a cooperative model."

read: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/67413-conrad-describes-outline-of-a-compromise-on-senate-health-bill



The 'not-for-profit' alternative Conrad is talking about is kin to an alternate proposal introduced by Tom Carper, D-Del. who would have health reform start with no public option and have states opt in: (http://healthtopic.nationaljournal.com/2009/11/senate-public-option.php)

"Carper is working on an alternate version of the trigger option that would set up a nonprofit board in states where insurance does not become more affordable. Carper says the plan could be a good middle ground for moderates unsure about a government-run option. While he hasn't lined up support for the plan, Carper notes that the plan is similar to Snowe's and incorporates the nonprofit idea from Kent Conrad, D-N.D."

[derby378]

1. Conrad and Carper can bite me

After that, they can caucus with the Republicans. Way to screw over your constituents, guys!

[geek tragedy]

2. Triggers for co-ops? Great!

Two shitty ideas combined into one really shitty idea.

[berni_mccoy]

4. That's not Conrad's proposal... that's Carper's. And yes, Carper's proposal sucks.

[BootinUp]

13. You just reminded me of a Lewis Black joke, lol.

Its about how the Republicans in Congress have bad ideas and the Democrats have ideas how to make them worse.

[geek tragedy]

15. Republican: I have a shitty idea! nt

[berni_mccoy]

3. So... Co-Ops *and* a Public Option? Ok, I can go with that.

[geek tragedy]

6. I'm skeptical that there will be both.

Doesn't add up.

[berni_mccoy]

7. I'm skeptical states would implement co-ops if there was a PO

but if they want to say states can do that, then fine.

If that's what it takes, it doesn't lose anything from reform to add that. If a state thinks they can provide a better option, so be it.

And this isn't far from Kucinich's state-based Single Payer option.

[geek tragedy]

10. It doesn't make sense that you'd compromise

with the 'no public option' people by including co-ops.

[bigtree]

12. then why shouldn't a state be able to opt for a single-payer system

. . . as Rep. Kucinich wants?

[joeybee12]

5. 75% are in favor of a public option, why is the fringe right considered centrist? n/t

[msongs]

8. LOL who won the election in 2008? dems afraid of change and using their power nt

[MidwestTransplant]

9. Isn't it just simply discgusting how they complain about cost then drive it higher. They are such

whores.

[Thrill]

11. I'm sorry but this needs to be said. The only reason to be against it tied to medicare rates

is if you are being paid by insurance companies.

Thats the ONLY reason to be against it.

[bigtree]

14. the industry (advocates) argue that tying it to medicare rates

. . . would cause hospitals and others to pass on the what they say would be less than the services cost them. The counter to that is that they have the means to lower those costs, but history says that rather than reform their services they'll just look to collect what they want or need somewhere else down the line. I can't think of any other way to set the rate though.

[geek tragedy]

16. The problem is that Medicare rates are perceived to be too low

in some Western and rural states. The thinking goes that if you force rural hospitals to pay based on the Medicare rates, they might go out of business.

Of course, the answer to that is to fix the freaking Medicare rates. But, good luck with that.