Bacus bill literally written by health insurance industry

[Broomstick]

Blue Cross doesn't like the idea of single payer, but they are far less afraid of it than other health insurance companies because they already have experience in that environment.

[Guardsman Bass]

Well, hell, back when Hillarycare was causing a ruckus I was employed by Blue Cross and there most certainly WAS a plan to, essentially, subvert the reform process back then (of course, the process was clothed in much more polite terms). I know there are contingency plans the industry plans to use should the country convert to single-payer. Why should anyone be surprised that health insurers have their fingers in the pie, now?

Are you allowed to talk about that? I'm guessing not, but it sounds like juicy reading.

Not really. While I did work for both VP's and CEO's in the Blue Cross system I was certainly not privy to all details of such plans, I certainly can't produce any documentation, and there was that agreement I signed in exchange for a significant severance package upon my departure.

I do know that, should the country go to single payer Blue Cross will attempt to step in as the administrator of the whole shebang - why not? They're already the administrator for Medicare, and used to be for TriCare until someone fucked up the reapplication process (and it really was a stupid error that lost them that contract). They already, collectively, cover 100 million "lives" - more than any other health insurer in the world, and more than the population of most countries. Certainly, such a change would severely reduce profits in the system, but Blue Cross has every intention of surviving such a change, if it ever occurs. A significant portion of Blue Cross is run as a not-for-profit anyway, and those areas typically run at a 3-5% overhead cost, as opposed to 10-20% or more at entirely for-profit health insurers. The Blue Cross system could adjust to reduced income much easier than some of its competitors.

The information about Blue Cross's role in managing several public health care administration systems is interesting. It's actually not a bad idea, per se - you'd be basically co-opting an already massive insurance company and then turning it into essentially a utility on the national level, instead of having to set-up an entirely new administrative infrastructure from top to bottom.

That'd also make for an interesting political strategy if the country ever went single-payer - in order to weaken resistance from the insurance companies, you could play them off against each other over who gets to be the monopoly on coverage at the end of the day.

[Broomstick]

The information about Blue Cross's role in managing several public health care administration systems is interesting. It's actually not a bad idea, per se - you'd be basically co-opting an already massive insurance company and then turning it into essentially a utility on the national level, instead of having to set-up an entirely new administrative infrastructure from top to bottom.

Right. It would be somewhat analogous to the US Postal system, but originating from a private company rather than from a public service.

That'd also make for an interesting political strategy if the country ever went single-payer - in order to weaken resistance from the insurance companies, you could play them off against each other over who gets to be the monopoly on coverage at the end of the day.

Won't work - everyone in the industry knows Blue Cross is in a superior position to become the administrator. You might get Blue Cross vs. Everyone Else, but no other company has such a huge network or such experience with working with government contracts (to the best of my knowledge - I'm not infallible here)

[The Yosemite Bear]

Wow.

If that means what it looks like on it's face, this whole deal is totally corrupt. I wonder how the fuck he's going to explain this one.

umm because...., hey look! Obama is a Commie Grandma killer, alien. <jk>

[Crossroads Inc.]

Once More I have to ask... Has anyone heard about tis on any mainstream news? CNN? MSNBC? NPR? No?
Damn Liberal Media...

[Darth Wong]

If she's a former executives, what's the big fuss? A conflict of interest arising from pass affiliation?

Coming at it from the other side, couldn't one say that this would be an individual with strong credentials for the post? (I haven't.) Have you read the Baucus bill? Is it a clear, and injurious, sop to corporate interests? Shouldn't that be the litmus test, if any?

It's amazing how incredibly weak cultural antipathy for conflict of interest is. Frankly, Baucus should be forced to explain any close working relationship with such people at all, regardless of whether they are actually personally writing documents for him.

[Surlethe]

To add to that, corruption is all about relationships. His staffer, as a former health industry executive, is bound to have extensive networking, business, and friendship relationships with people who have strong incentives to oppose good health care reform. She has probably spent decades cultivating these relationships, and she certainly has a similar working relationship with Baucus. Because of this network, she's going to act as an influence on him away from decent reform toward insurance industry handouts.

[Dominus Atheos]

lol

hey guys lets use internet-speak to dismiss entire pieces of evidence without providing any of our own

Do you actually have a response to my alternative explanation, or do you agree that you have no solid evidence that this is anything noteworthy?

If you have questions, do your own damn research.

The burden of proof is on you, fuckwad.

I have submitted two copies of the document, you haven't posted a single piece of evidence.

But I'll make this easy: You said you think the Metadata was changed for some reason. As per DR6, I'm demanding evidence of that claim. Produce it or shut the fuck up.

If you can find a copy that shows "Max Baucus" or some staffer as the author then we'll discuss it.

... I just now opened the file for the first time. (Yeah, your "evidence" is so flawed I was able to question it without actually looking at it before.)

You're bragging that you hadn't even looked at the evidence until now?

And it isn't even a fucking bill! So your subject line is a lie. This is just a list of conversation points "for consideration by the bipartisan six", which "Chairman Baucus proposes for consideration and response".

Baldfaced lie. Conversation points? Where does it say conversation points? If you'd bother quoting the whole thing it clearly says:

This document constitutes a framework of a plan for consideration by the Bipartisan Six. The policies outlined here represent many of the policies discussed with Finance Committee members and described in previous options papers. In addition, the policies also reflect the group’s conversations and the group’s work throughout the summer, including throughout the August recess. Chairman Baucus proposes this framework for consideration and response by the next meeting scheduled for Tuesday, September 8, 2009.

This is the plan that Baucus is submitting to the Finance Committee. If you don't understand the process, go watch schoolhouse rock.

Even if this was indeed authored by her - which you still haven't conclusively proven, though it is now moot - this says nothing about the actual bill being written. Lots of people are surely offering lists of ideas to consider.

Yes it's true that the plan could be changed before it gets out of committee, which is why I called it the Baucus bill and not the Finance Committee bill.

Either
a) Prove that the "Bacus bill [was] literally written by health insurance industry"

or b) Concede your lies

The bill Max Baucus is submitting to the Finance Committee to be voted on and written up into the Finance Committee bill show it's author as Liz Fowler. Liz Fowler Is a former Vice President of Wellpoint. She used to work for Baucus until 2005 and helped write the notorious industry giveaway Medicare Part D. Then in 2008 she left her job at Wellpoint solely to try to affect health care reform efforts.

If you refuse to find your own evidence then shut the fuck up and get out of the thread.

You're the only one here refusing to back up his claims and answer counterpoints.

I am not doing your goddamn research for you. Back up your claims or shut the fuck up.

[Dominus Atheos]

Once More I have to ask... Has anyone heard about tis on any mainstream news? CNN? MSNBC? NPR? No?
Damn Liberal Media...

Of course not. Every left-wing blog and New Media site is discussing it, but there's nary a peep from the Old Media.