TPMDC
Ross Says He Once Suggested A Medicare Buy-In As A Replacement For Separate Public Option
Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR)
Share
Send to a friend!
Earlier today, The Hill ran with an eye-catching statement from Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR)--the chair of the Blue Dog's health care task force who recently announced he doesn't support a public option.
"I -- speaking only on behalf of myself -- suggested one possible idea could be that instead of creating an entirely new government bureaucracy to administer a public option, Medicare could be offered as a choice," Ross said.
Under Ross's suggestion, consumers under 65 would be allowed to buy insurance directly from Medicare, and Medicare would pay significantly higher reimbursement rates for those patients. But it's unclear when Ross made this suggestion, and it clearly hasn't gained any traction.
An aide to a Blue Dog tells me that the idea isn't reflective of the ongoing discussions within the caucus (Ross's statement--"speaking only on behalf of myself"--suggests as much). And, it's worth noting that a number of Blue Dogs are fairly supportive of the public option, which is projected to be a big money saver.
All in all, a surprising statement from a Blue Dog who often makes surprises, but notreflective of a public option shift in the House.
Comments (15) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Indie Pro
October 15, 2009 6:45 PM
I like all the talk of bringing the Insurance Industry under the Anti-Trust laws.
oh and this, but I'm skeptical.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
October 15, 2009 7:28 PM
How exactly is a public option different from allowing people to buy into Medicare? Having seen how my parents were treated by Medicare, I would buy in in a New York minute. Actually it would probably be better than whatever eventually comes out as a public option since the insurance industry wouldn't have a voice in modifying it. Just as long as anyone who wants to can buy into it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ohyeathatsright
October 15, 2009 7:40 PM
Shouldn't doctors treating younger people be reimbursed at lower rates and seniors at higher ones instead?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
October 15, 2009 8:13 PM
What the hell!? If he spoke up about this crap 5 freaking months ago I gurantee we wouldn't even be talking about a PO. THIS idea is even better than a PO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eric Jaffa
October 15, 2009 9:09 PM in reply to theone718
President Clinton said in a State of the Union speech in 1999, "We should give people between the ages of 55 and 65 who lose their health insurance the chance to buy into Medicare."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jpearson
October 15, 2009 10:22 PM
This is what I've been suggesting in emails to senators and on blogs for months...and no one, even on a blog, has responded to it.
Just let those who would qualify for a public option buy into Medicare. This may actually be better than a public option because the infrastructure is already there, there would be no need for a new bureaucracy, and we wouldn't have to worry about a public option being emasculated by not being allowed to negotiate low enough rates.
It also seems like a much easier sell, since it's a program that has already proven to be both very popular and very effective. (And it wouldn’t be Medicare For All, which seems to scare people. It would just be for those who would qualify for a public option.) I really can’t understand why this isn’t being seriously considered.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
October 16, 2009 12:13 AM
My wife says this all the time when we talk about HCR. She says, rather forcefully, "we already have govt health care. You use it. It's called Medicare". It never sunk in till she explained to me that you lower the Medicare eligibility age every year. Details to be worked out but structure and popularity already in place. Cost almost nothing. A slow squeeze of the HC industry. Reduce this drama marathon by 90%. How about an executive order Mr. President!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nancy Irving
October 16, 2009 1:31 AM
'President Clinton said in a State of the Union speech in 1999, "We should give people between the ages of 55 and 65 who lose their health insurance the chance to buy into Medicare."'
Not good enough. People "who lose their health insurance" are people who've already become ill. That's the reason they lost their insurance. If they were well, the private insurers would be happy to continue "insuring" them.
We don't need an influx of (only) sick people into EITHER a public option or Medicare. We need a cross-section of the general population--mostly well people, some sick people--joining up. That's the only way this would be affordable.
The government's taking care of the sick, while the private insurers get to "insure" (i.e., take premiums off) the well, is a recipe for disaster.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
October 16, 2009 6:37 AM in reply to Nancy Irving
One of the biggest expenses on the provider end which is driving up costs is multiple insurers. Ever see a billing department in a hospital? Byzantine. And huge. And very expensive. A P.O. doesn't really address this.
If Medicaid or Medicare were made the P.O. (or, even if they aren't), how to design the P.O. so it does not become the dumping ground for the 'problem cases' (sick people) of the insurance industry that they want to get rid of?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoHF_7lZx_8
Basically, you adjust the risk pool.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SchrodingersCat
October 16, 2009 8:46 AM in reply to Nancy Irving
I'm not disagreeing with your general point of the insurance getting the healthy people, etc., but people lose their insurance for all sorts of reasons...not just because they're sick. Lose a job, can't afford the premiums, employer stops coverage, etc.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Florida Democrat
October 16, 2009 5:35 AM
Quick question: Does this guy hold any Democratic values? He sounds like a moderate Republican to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
October 16, 2009 6:26 AM
Too little, Too late Ross. Many of you and your ilk in the blue dog coalition will STILL be blamed should a strong PO (or something like it) NOT make it into the final HC legislation.
This kind of obvious misdirection bullshit will not save you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fpie
October 16, 2009 7:41 AM in reply to willia451
Are you intimating that the Blue Weasels are tumbling to the reality that THEIR constituants want a strong public option?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
October 16, 2009 9:51 AM in reply to fpie
What I'm saying is he's hedging his bets. Saying something like this is Ross's way of trying to appeal to his more progressive constituents. Its like, "See? Forget everything I've said and done up to this point. I was always open to a progressive position. Its just that the RIGHT progressive position was never allowed or considered."
But its bullshit. If he really believed what he has said, where the fuck was he 5 months ago when we needed his support?
He's such an asshole, I can't even believe it.
Even the Republicans would not touch this waste of time. If he switched parties, he would immediately have a primary challenger on his right flank and get destroyed.
Screw him.
Let this asshole swing in the breeze and die on the vine. We don't need him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Powkat
October 16, 2009 1:12 PM
As reform gets closer to the finish line, it seems that more and more blue dogs are moving ever so slightly toward some sort of governmental program. With a few exceptions, nobody wants to be the Democrat who cast the vote that makes this fail.
Joe Lieberman, maybe because he would be the center of attention and Joe likes nothing more than being the center of attention. I suspect that he is being closely watched and will be told the facts of life if he tries to blow it up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?