An unhealthy plan

In just one week since its proposal, Sen. Max Baucus’s health care plan has faced criticism from all angles, including 564 submitted amendments by the Finance Committee and zero approvals from any of the three Republican members that assisted in its creation.

But is the plan that bad, or are there more people ready to point out flaws than propose solutions?

We say it’s a little of both.

The plan calls for an end to discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, which is a critical and essential step up from a system that picks and prods over who is the healthiest and the wealthiest.

Current health care providers not only actively seek out clients to drop when they become ill – or have shown signs of illness in the past – but they are driven to those decisions by a market that rewards this behavior.

The bill also calls for other broad system reforms, like a cap on an individual’s annual health care costs.

The cap, however, has been criticized for still being too high. The Baucus plan would provide subsidies to individuals who spend more than 13 percent of their income on health care.

Other plans have called for 12 percent or less, which would most likely be a better option considering the bill would also make it a law for most people to carry health care – much like car insurance. This is where the bill gets iffy.

Although individuals will be required to have health care, businesses will not be required to provide it.

Instead, penalties will be placed on businesses and individuals who do not provide or carry health care respectively. This seems like a major flaw.

Businesses should be more accountable in a “reformed” system to provide their employees health care – and this shouldn’t be a burden to small businesses because the cost of health care should go down in a new system.

There, again, in-lies a problem. The Baucus plan will not force market prices in health care to go down because there will be no government-public option available.

Instead, subsidized, non-profit co-ops will be put in place to provide more cost-effective health care to middle and lower-class individuals and families.

Not only is this a failed compromise between parties – as it goes against most liberals who want a fully government-run system and goes against most Republicans as it calls for more government spending – but it is also a failed economic strategy.

Non-profits will not be able to compete with the large, monopoly-like health care providers that are in place today. It will merely increase state and federal spending to back the companies and increase the deficit with no long-term gain.

While other problems – such as cutting down on Medicare – are still looming in this bill, what is redeemable are the bi-partisan attempts to reform a seemingly broken system.
Baucus has risen to the call of Obama to create a plan that can pass through Congress without raking up a massive budget.

His plan, which still calls for more than $750 billion throughout 10 years, is actually less than some other options.

Additionally, he stood alone and faced his peers and constituents with a plan that was doomed for failure no matter how brilliant.

Frankly, health care reform is too overwhelming to fix with one sit-down and the fact that he stepped up to the plate is admirable.