Progressive Breakfast: Who's Buying Medicare Buy-in?

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day

Medicare Buy-In Proposal Roils Congress

Sens. Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman start to hedge on deal. Politico: "Lieberman indicated that he was growing 'increasingly concerned' about the proposal. And Nelson said allowing people between ages 55 and 64 to purchase Medicare coverage could simply be an intermediate step on the way to an entirely government-run health care system — 'which I do not like.'"

Special interests threaten to drop support. CQ: "...the so-called Medicare buy-in is prompting substantial opposition from interest groups representing hospitals, doctors and insurers — some of whom the Obama administration and its allies in Congress courted early in the debate to build momentum for a health care overhaul. None of the players have yet said they will walk away from negotiations, though insurers appear closest to doing so and have been the most critical of the overhaul effort. But the Senate Democrats’ maneuvers are making industry groups uncomfortable — and raising prospects that some could yet abandon the overhaul effort."

Sen. Harry Reid proclaims Medicare buy-in "better" than previous public option proposal. HuffPost: "...he lambasted Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the Democrats' long-desired dash of bipartisanship, for swinging against a Medicare buy-in proposal. Snowe's fellow health care roadblock Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) also said Thursday that he is 'increasingly troubled' by the prospect of expanded Medicare rolls ... 'It's hard to believe they don't like something when they don't know what's in it,' Reid said."

Sen. Jeff Merkley hesitant to back deal. HuffPost quotes: "The basic challenge for Oregon is that a program that expands Medicare using existing Medicare rates would be of very little use in our state. And the reason why is because the reimbursement rates are so low in the state of Oregon that doctors aren't taking additional Medicare patients... They can fill their agenda and their schedules with higher-paying patients."

Speaker Pelosi supportive of Senate deal. W. Post: "The speaker stopped short of embracing the broader contours of a fragile compromise worked out by liberal and moderate Senate negotiators in an effort to nudge forward broad changes to the health-care system. Still, she said: 'There's certainly a great deal of appeal' to expanding Medicare."

Skeptical reaction from AARP. W. Post: "[AARP's John Rother] and others said it remains unclear whether the program would be designed with the same health benefits, co-payments by patients, or access to private health plans and supplemental coverage as the rest of Medicare. Depending on such details, Rother said, 'it's not even Medicare, but that's a brand name everyone likes.' Still, he said, AARP always has favored the creation of a buy-in, as long as it would not worsen the Medicare system's already shaky finances."

FireDogLake's Jane Hamsher attacks Pelosi to supporting Senate deal praises Rep. Grijalva for pledging opposition.

Reid reveals more details. NYT:

*The new Medicare option would be available only to individuals, not to families. In a household consisting of a 60-year-old man, his 50-year-old wife and their 18-year-old daughter, only the man would be eligible for Medicare.

*People 55 to 64 would receive the same benefits as people in the traditional Medicare program. The Democrats’ bill would limit out-of-pocket spending on health care by people in private plans ($5,000 a year for individuals and $10,000 for families). Medicare does not have such limits.

*Medicare premiums for people under 65 would differ from those paid by people 65 and older, and the two parts of the program would be financed separately.

Marilyn Moon, a health economist and former public trustee of Medicare, said that for people 55 to 64, Medicare premiums could be higher than premiums charged by private health plans. Health policy experts said that the people who chose to enroll in Medicare were likely to be heavy users of health care, with higher-than-average costs.

GoozNews says higher premiums for older workers are inevitable: "Will Medicare-Early (or whatever they might call a policy that allows 55-to-64-year-olds to buy into the nation's retiree health care system) be affordable? Many wonks are saying no. I don't get their argument. Wouldn't private insurance be equally unaffordable for this age group if the private market is allowed to risk adjust for age, as the Senate bill allows?"

Public option policy architect Jacob Hacker lends initial support to Medicare buy-in. HuffPost: "...he was critical of some of the policy negotiations, in particular the decision to replace an actual public option with something run by private insurers and regulated by the government -- which he deemed 'inadequate' and incompatible with the president's principles of reform. But in a segment on PBS's Newshour, Hacker did call the proposed expansion of Medicare an 'enormous, positive development.'"

McClatchy and Time sift through pros and cons.

Senate snagged on Dorgan drug importation amendment. Chicago Tribune: "Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., temporarily halted Senate consideration of the health care bill after three days of inconclusive debate on an amendment by Sens. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and John McCain, R-Ariz., that would allow U.S. pharmacies and wholesalers to import drugs from Canada and other countries with safety standards comparable to those of the U.S. Despite Obama's interest in such a measure, which he campaigned on last year and says he still supports, the White House feared that if the amendment were approved, the powerful drug industry would turn against the entire health care bill."

Major insurer coercing employees to oppose reform. Under The Influence: "A California-based consumer organization has accused UnitedHealth Group of coercing its workers to listen to a seminar on healthcare reform legislation. Consumer Watchdog released an internal email from the company which said, in part, 'Health care reform is at a critical moment with the Senate considering proposed legislation. Join United for Health Reform for a status update on this important debate! United for Health Reform will be hosting a webinar on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 from 1:00-1:30 PM CDT to provide an update on the health care reform debate in Washington, D.C. ... As with all events held during business hours, please confirm your ability to attend with your supervisor.' 'This demand that workers attend a virtual meeting about company lobbying messages, on company time, is political harassment,' said Judy Dugan, research director for Consumer Watchdog..."

Financial Reform Nears House Passage

Package of amendments approved on House floor. CQ: "The package from Frank adds compromise pre-emption language that would modestly expand the bill’s federal pre-emption of state consumer laws. Business-friendly New Democrats, led by Rep. Melissa Bean, of Illinois, had pushed for the changes, which would allow for pre-emption if the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency finds that a state law 'prevents, significantly interferes with or materially impairs' a national bank’s ability to do business. The amendment also would authorize $4 billion in bailout funds (PL 110-343) for housing relief, and it would reduce to 10 percent the size of a haircut that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) could impose on secured creditors of failing financial firms placed into receivership. It would limit the haircut to short-term debt and clarify that the language would not apply to government securities being used as collateral."

PRWatch.org's Mary Bottari's criticizes Bean amendment: "...conservative Democrats managed to wring damaging concessions out of House leadership before the debate even began. Big bank defenders, led by Melissa Bean (D-IL), got language into the bill that would allow federal laws governing consumer protection to preempt many of those set by individual states and make it harder for state Attorneys General to enforce consumer protections."

Wonk Room's Pat Garofalo criticizes conservative Republicans for mischaracterizing the overall bill: "GOP Falsely Claims Reg Reform Bill Creates A ‘Permanent Bailout Fund’ Paid For By Taxpayers"

Naked Capitalism's L. Randall Wray lambastes bill as weak: "[It] appears to amount to shifting chairs on the deck of the sinking Titanic."

Amendment to kill consumer agency expected today before final vote. The Hill: "The House is slated on Friday to pass wide-ranging financial overhaul legislation as Democratic leaders look to overcome an effort to scuttle a new federal consumer protection agency. One of the most closely watched votes in the debate will come on an amendment sponsored by Rep. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho) that would replace the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) with a council of existing regulators ... The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is running a multi-million dollar campaign against the CFPA and strongly supports the Minnick amendment. The Chamber said on Thursday that it would key-vote the amendment, raising pressure on centrist Democrats to oppose it."

Geithner criticized by congressional oversight panel for bailing out AIG counterparties in full reports NYT.

More exec pay caps today. Politico: "The nation’s “pay czar” is at it again Friday, and this time, midlevel executives at bailed-out firms are getting a pay cut.Fewer than 10 of the 450 employees will be allowed to earn more than $500,000 per year, according to a source familiar with the plan, which covers six firms that received federal bailout funds."

EU backs financial transaction tax. BBC: "The leaders called on the IMF to look at a range of options to ensure that banks do not take excessive risks that could lead to another financial crisis. The call comes in a draft statement expected to be approved later."

Baucus Opposes Conrad-Gregg Deficit Commission

Senate Finance Cmte Chair Baucus rips bypassing of regular process envisioned in proposed deficit commission. NYT quotes: "If Congress is going to outsource its core fiscal responsibilities, why stop with just those responsibilities? Why not cede to this commission all the legislation in the next Congress? Why don’t we outsource the entire year’s work and then adjourn for the year? ... It is clear from their press release that Senators Conrad and Gregg have painted a big red target on Social Security and Medicare ... That’s what this commission is all about. It’s a big roll of the dice for Social Security and Medicare.”

OurFuture.org's Digby dissects the motivation by right-leaning Dems to push commission now: "...what's driving this initiative is the mass confusion around the bad economy and the financial system catastrophe, which provides the perfect moment to push a little 'economic shock therapy' on the American people."

House Blue Dogs push PAYGO, while right-leaning Senators stick with commission. CQ: "The Blue Dogs have told the leadership that they may vote against the rule to bring the Defense bill [with the debt limit increase attached] to the floor, which could sink the rule, if the pay-as-you-go bill is not included ... The law would require new mandatory spending or tax cuts to be offset by savings or revenue increases elsewhere in the budget. Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has led the opposition to the bill, arguing that it exempts such expensive policies as preventing cuts in Medicare payments to physicians and keeping the alternative minimum tax from affecting middle class taxpayers ... Late Thursday afternoon, Conrad and the group of moderates huddled with Senate leaders and administration officials, including White House Budget Director Peter R. Orszag and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, to discuss the issue. Participants in the meeting, who described it as positive, said the message delivered was that the group would not take kindly to being presented with a yearlong debt limit increase as part of the Defense bill. Conrad said an increase lasting only a few months may be acceptable while a compromise on a commission is worked out among the centrists, the White House and congressional leaders."

Concern About Job Growth Deepens

W. Post explores WH plans to use TARP for small biz: "One plan under consideration involves spinning off a new entity from the Troubled Assets Relief Program that would give banks access to federal funds without restrictions, including limits on executive pay, as long as the money was used to support loans to small businesses. But officials are not yet certain whether carving the program out of TARP would be the best way to encourage banks to boost small-business lending, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plans are not final. As an alternative, officials are prepared to ask Congress to modify TARP itself, easing the pay limits and other restrictions that would be imposed on small-business lenders taking the money, the sources said ...The Treasury prefers to set up the program on its own, without the need for a congressional change to TARP, which could be time-consuming..."

Krugman calls on Bernanke to fight unemployment harder: "[Former Fed staffer Joseph] Gagnon urges the Fed to expand credit by buying a further $2 trillion in assets. Such a program could do a lot to promote faster growth, while having hardly any downside. So why isn’t the Fed doing it? ... The Fed sprang into action when faced with the prospect of wrecked banks; it doesn’t seem equally concerned about the prospect of wrecked lives."

China's stimulus working smashingly. NYT: "China’s authorities were quick to pump-prime the economy in wake of last year’s global financial crisis, and gross domestic product is forecast to grow more than 8 percent this year — vastly more than the United States, Europe or Japan — despite a sharp drop in exports. On Friday, data for November showed industrial output had soared 19.2 percent from a year ago, while imports jumped 26.7 percent."

Europe Puts $3B On Table At Copenhagen

EU makes concession on aid to poor nations. NYT: "The European Union will contribute about $3 billion starting next year to help poorer countries deal with climate change, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain announced on Friday, a move that seeks to improve the chances of reaching an accord next week at climate change talks in Copenhagen ... European diplomats said leaders still needed to decide whether to make some aspects of the funding they had pledged for the fast-start fund conditional on other major industrialized economies contributing to the pot."

Wonk Room's Brad Johnson knocks US envoy for downplaying history of emissions: "To be fair to Stern, it was only in the 1950s that the physics was better understood, and scientists began warning the public to be concerned about global warming pollution. But nearly all of the world’s global warming pollution — including that from the United States — has come since 1960."

Tripartisan Senate Trio Releases Climate Compromise Framework

Climate Progress deems announcement major advancement: "We are likely to get a bipartisan, economy-wide bill on the Senate floor 'early next year' as Kerry put it. Lieberman said the bill would become law 'in this session of Congress.' A lot of big news came out of the press conference ... the bipartisan group endorsed a cut in carbon pollution 'in the range of 17'%' by 2020 ... it backs up the pledge the President has announced he is taking to Copenhagen ... Graham made clear that he — and most Republicans he has spoken to — understand that 'unlimited carbon pollution' is not an option. That’s why he endorses a mechanism that sets a carbon price. We’ll learn in the coming months how many Rs he gets on board with him. I’m guessing another four."

Green Energy Reporter finds the framework "pretty vague": "Apparently, they’re following Obama’s approach of outsourcing the writing of legislation to committee chairs. But they intend to get the bill to a floor vote by early next year ... There are some subheds about 'securing energy independence', 'protecting commerce' and 'encouraging nuclear power', among others, but few details."

WSJ notes the importance of nuclear power to Graham: "All three senators stressed that the compromise bill supports an 'all of the above' energy package. That means, in Sen. Kerry’s telling, 'renewable energy, clean coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy.' Sen. Graham, not surprisingly, inverted the order."

The Vine's Bradford Plumer sees EPA move pressing Sen. Mark Pyror to act on Senate legislation.

Coal Tattoo laments WV camps unmoved by Sen. Byrd's admonishment for King Coal and enviros to find middle-ground: "The one thing that Sen. Byrd seemed to be getting at is that this yelling and screaming, this name-calling, angry confrontations, intimidation and — perhaps above all — refusal to even consider compromise, isn’t getting West Virginia anywhere. We’re fighting old battles, while the rest of the nation and world are moving into the future."

American Petroleum Institute ad attacking carbon cap legislation uses doctored photo to include faces of color. Under The Influence: "The advertisement discusses American jobs associated with the oil and natural gas industry. Among the group are two faces that don't quite fit the bodies. The black fellow on the left has been caught white-handed. The man on the right clearly suffers from Caucasian-neck disease."

$1.4B deal for largest US wind farm announced. NYT: "General Electric will supply wind turbines to what it says will be the nation’s largest wind farm ... The 2.5 megawatt turbines from G.E. will be assembled in Pensacola, Fla., with more than half of the parts (measured by value) being made in the United States, according to Mr. Bolze. Asked whether any of the turbine pieces would come from China, he said: 'I think on this one, if it is, it’s a negligible piece at this point.'"

Views expressed on this page are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Campaign for America's Future or Institute for America's Future