House now on a July timeline: The three House committees with healthcare reform jurisdiction all held hearings last week. Mark-ups and floor action are expected in July and Speaker Pelosi has set a deadline of House floor passage before the August recess. Meanwhile, the independent HIS Network estimated that a House healthcare reform bill would cost U.S. taxpayers $3.5 trillion.

Speaking of trillions: The Senate Finance committee apparently carved out enough expense from its healthcare reform approach to reduce its cost to an even $1 trillion, down from $1.6 trillion previously. Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) claimed that “We have options that would enable us to write a bill that is fully paid for” without increasing the budget deficit and while covering 97% of the U.S. population. But we’re still waiting for details on an employer mandate and whether a public plan would be included in the health insurance exchange.

HELP Committee focuses on cutting waste: Continuing to mark-up its healthcare reform bill, the Senate HELP Committee considered ways to help address waste and abuse of federal programs. Next week they are expected to begin focusing on long-term care issues. As in the Finance Committee, the HELP panel has not yet drafted language on the contentious issues of an employer mandate or a public plan in the health insurance exchange.

Senators consider a different approach: “free-rider” provision: Perhaps the reason legislative language is slow to take shape regarding an employer mandate is a new idea under consideration: the “free-rider” provision. Rather than impose an employer mandate to offer coverage, it would require employers to pay 50% of the cost for any employee who receives benefits through Medicaid. Employers would be assessed 100% of any low-income employee receiving health care from a federal subsidy. And it would prohibit any non-Medicaid-eligible employees from entering the exchange if their cost-share of coverage is less than 12.5% of their salary.

Here comes NRRA again: The Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2009 was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Mel Martinez (R-FL) after earlier being introduced in the House. NRRA was first introduced in 2006 and has been passed twice in the House while the Senate has let it die for lack of attention. NRRA is possibly a stalking horse for federal insurance reform, as it would create a uniform regulatory system for surplus lines insurance and reinsurance. Supporters say it would help consumers by making property/liability insurance more readily available and improving the efficiency of the surplus lines market.

Tags:

This entry was posted by Adam V. Russo on Thursday, July 2nd, 2009 at 8:25 am and is filed under Health Care Legislation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.