First health care dominio falls...

[CosmicCowboy]

Obama pulls plug on part of health overhaul law

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Associated Press

Health Video

Advertisement

Buy AP Photo Reprints


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration Friday pulled the plug on a major program in the president's signature health overhaul law - a long-term care insurance plan dogged from the beginning by doubts over its financial solvency.

Targeted by congressional Republicans for repeal, the long-term care plan became the first casualty in the political and policy wars over the health care law. The program had been expected to launch in 2013.

"This is a victory for the American taxpayer and future generations," said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., spearheading opposition in the Senate. "The administration is finally admitting (the long-term care plan) is unsustainable and cannot be implemented."

Proponents, including many groups that fought to pass the health care law, have vowed a vigorous effort to rescue the long-term care plan, insisting that Congress gave the administration broad authority to make changes.

Known as CLASS, the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports program was a longstanding priority of the late Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

Although sponsored by the government, it was supposed to function as a self-sustaining voluntary insurance plan, open to working adults regardless of age or health. Workers would pay an affordable monthly premium during their careers, and could collect a modest daily cash benefit of at least $50 if they became disabled later in life. Beneficiaries could use the money for services to help them stay at home, or to help with nursing home bills.

But a central design flaw dogged CLASS from the beginning. Unless large numbers of healthy people willingly sign up during their working years, soaring premiums driven by the needs of disabled beneficiaries would destabilize it, eventually requiring a taxpayer bailout.

After months insisting that problems could be resolved, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, finally admitted Friday she doesn't see how that can be done.

"Despite our best analytical efforts, I do not see a viable path forward for CLASS implementation at this time," Sebelius said in a letter to congressional leaders.

The law required the administration to certify that CLASS would remain financially solvent for 75 years before it could be put into place.

But officials said they discovered they could not make CLASS both affordable and financially solvent while keeping it a voluntary program open to virtually all workers, as the law also required.

Monthly premiums would have ranged from $235 to $391, even as high as $3,000 under some scenarios, the administration said. At those prices, healthy people were unlikely to sign up. Suggested changes geared at discouraging enrollment by people in poor health would have opened the program to court challenges, officials said.

"If healthy purchasers are not attracted ... then premiums will increase, which will make it even more unattractive to purchasers who could also obtain policies in the private market," Kathy Greenlee, the lead official on CLASS, said in a memo to Sebelius. That "would cause the program to quickly collapse."

That's essentially the same conclusion that one the government's top experts reached in 2009. Nearly a year before the health care law passed, Richard Foster, head of long-range economic forecasts for Medicare warned administration and congressional officials that CLASS would be unworkable. His warnings were disregarded, as Obama declared his support for adding the long-term care plan to his health care bill.

The demise of CLASS immediately touched off speculation about its impact on the federal budget. Although no premiums are likely to be collected, the program still counts as reducing the federal deficit by about $80 billion over the next ten years. That's because of a rule that would have required workers to pay in for at least five years before they could collect any benefits.

"The CLASS Act was a budget gimmick that might enhance the numbers on a Washington bureaucrat's spreadsheet but was destined to fail in the real world," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Administration officials said Obama's next budget would reflect the decision not to go forward. Even without CLASS premiums, they said Obama's health care law will still reduce the deficit by more than $120 billion over 10 years.

Kennedy's original idea was to give families some financial breathing room. The burden of long-term care is growing. Most families cannot afford to hire a home health aide for a frail elder, let alone pay nursing home bills. Long-term care is usually provided by family members, often a spouse who may also have health problems.

Sebelius said Friday the administration remains committed to that larger goal, and wants to work with Congress and supporters of the plan to find a way. But it appears unlikely that CLASS can be salvaged in the foreseeable future. Congressional Republicans say they are committed to its repeal.

[boutons_deux]

Why The CLASS Demise Is Not A Sign Of Health Reform’s Failure

Today’s news that HHS will not administer CLASS — the Affordable Care Act’s long term care program — is already being touted by conservatives as emblematic of the law’s failure. The first “gimmick” in a long line of “budgetary tricks” that will ultimately sink reform. But it is nothing of the sort.

Kathleen Sebelius’ decision to end the program is yet another example of the success of one of the law’s safety clutches (this one was actually introduced by former Republican Sen. Judd Gregg). The ACA prohibits the Secretary from ins uting CLASS unless the program can sustain itself without tax payer funding for 75 years. Sebelius and her team concluded that it the program wouldn’t attract healthier applicants and as a result pay out more than it would take in. That it was suspended at this point is a better example of the administration’s fiscal restrain and economic stewardship than its failure.

And by the way, critics are misunderstanding what this announcement really means. The administration’s conclusion that a voluntary program results in an unsustainable death spiral is actually and indictment of those who want to repeal the individual mandate and a point of vindication for advocates who argue that the mandate is necessary to maintain the ACA’s coverage expansions and affordability.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011...eform-failure/

[clambake]

whats a dominio?

[Wild Cobra]

How can he pull the plug on something voted into law, and that he signed?

--- nevernind ---

Still, the reasons are what we conservatives were saying all along. It simply is too costly of a program.

[Wild Cobra]

whats a dominio?

Come on now...

It's obvious he had the "i" key jump out in front of the "o" key:

[EVAY]

It seems to me that this represents a very good thing. It also reflects some aspects of bipartisan interests in that the requirement that the CLASS portion of the law not be enacted unless it could be found to be economically viable for 75 years is due to a Republican senator...and the administration is following the law by acknowledging that because it cannot be shown to be viable, it will not be implemented.

Isn't this a win/win for everyone?

[EVAY]

Wouldn't we want any social (or defense ) program to be solvency-tested in this way?

[EVAY]

The proverbial rubber will meet the road, I believe, when the courts address the issue of the cons utionality of the mandatory insurance requirement. If that requirement is deemed uncons utional, then the entire health care law becomes prohibitively expensive, imo. But if the courts allow that provision to remain in the existing law, I think the enitre program goes forward with a chance of lowering the rate of increase in health care costs. It is not going to lower health care costs...but it might lower the rate of increase, and that would really be a help for lots of us.

[Wild Cobra]

It seems to me that this represents a very good thing. It also reflects some aspects of bipartisan interests in that the requirement that the CLASS portion of the law not be enacted unless it could be found to be economically viable for 75 years is due to a Republican senator...and the administration is following the law by acknowledging that because it cannot be shown to be viable, it will not be implemented.

Isn't this a win/win for everyone?

I agree it's a win. Obama failed, though belated. At least i think so. Doesn't this pretty much blow away Obamacare as a whole? I believe the only thing somewhat costly implemented so far is requiring that health care plans include dependents till they are 26. It allowed me to keep youngest my daughter on my plan, but I did see a big premium jump. Can't say how much of the jump would have happened without the change though. It still would have increased.

[Wild Cobra]

Wouldn't we want any social (or defense ) program to be solvency-tested in this way?

We already see that the war on poverty and the war on drugs are a failure. I say we stop those programs.

[EVAY]

I agree it's a win. Obama failed, though belated. At least i think so. Doesn't this pretty much blow away Obamacare as a whole? I believe the only thing somewhat costly implemented so far is requiring that health care plans include dependents till they are 26. It allowed me to keep youngest my daughter on my plan, but I did see a big premium jump. Can't say how much of the jump would have happened without the change though. It still would have increased.

I don't really agree that Obama failed. If it was his law, it was ALL his law, including the solvency test. So he is obeying the law, which is written to include some good economic variables as well as some other things.

I don't think that your daughter would have been able to be on your plan, regardless of the size of the premium, without this new law. She would have had to get insurance on her own, or be without any. The fact that so many young people ARE without health care insurance is one of the things that the law requiring everybody to carry insurance is meant to address.

[EVAY]

We already see that the war on poverty and the war on drugs are a failure. I say we stop those programs.

What about defense contracts for Navy destroyers that are no longer useful, according to the last Defense Secretary?

There are LOTS of things in lots of areas that couldn't survive the scrutiny that is part of this law. That's why I like the law...or at least that part of it.

[ChuckD]

Can you imagine a present day Republican reconsidering something they had put into law? I sure as can't.

Not only can they not admit a mistake, they are so insecure that can't even admit the possibility of a mistake.

[Wild Cobra]

What about defense contracts for Navy destroyers that are no longer useful, according to the last Defense Secretary?

There are LOTS of things in lots of areas that couldn't survive the scrutiny that is part of this law. That's why I like the law...or at least that part of it.

Well, first of all, existing contracts need to be honored. I would say it most likely if the defense secretary says we don't need it, then we don't. If I recall, such things happen as congressmen make deals so their cons uents get something, making them look good for bringing home the bacon. Now it's important for congress to represent their voters, I just wish their was a simple way to stop such deal making. I wish their was some way to expose and throw them out on their asses.

I think a start would be not allowing any amendments in legislation outside the scope and function or the originating bill. To allow amendments in bills where a representative or senator effectively says "I will vote on a bill if my amendment is in it" should be a federal crime.

[Wild Cobra]

Can you imagine a present day Republican reconsidering something they had put into law? I sure as can't.

Not only can they not admit a mistake, they are so insecure that can't even admit the possibility of a mistake.

Obama had no choice. How long did it take to realize his idea was no good?

[ChumpDumper]

How can he pull the plug on something voted into law, and that he signed?

--- nevernind ---

Still, the reasons are what we conservatives were saying all along. It simply is too costly of a program.

The health care mandate is a conservative idea sold by conservatives until a liberal agreed.

[Yonivore]

And, once the Supremes laugh the individual mandate out of their court, along with disallowing severability of the provision from the rest of the law, the whole idiotic idea will be a big stinking heap of dung on the courthouse floor.

I'm sure Chief Justice Roberts will kindly ask the Solicitor General to clean up the mess and remove it from the building.

[DMX7]

WC - proving how ing stupid he is as usual. Now republicans are against small business tax credits, payroll tax cuts and the EPA (which a republican president created).

[DMX7]

And, once the Supremes laugh the individual mandate out of their court...

That won't happen. You know very little about the Supreme Court if you think they won't uphold that part.

[ChumpDumper]

And, once the Supremes laugh the individual mandate out of their court, along with disallowing severability of the provision from the rest of the law, the whole idiotic idea will be a big stinking heap of dung on the courthouse floor.

I'm sure Chief Justice Roberts will kindly ask the Solicitor General to clean up the mess and remove it from the building.

Why would the SCOTUS determine the severability of the other provisions if it hasn't even happened yet?

[Yonivore]

WC - proving how ing stupid he is as usual. Now republicans are against small business tax credits, payroll tax cuts and the EPA (which a republican president created).

Things change and Democrats manage to corrupt and bas ize every good idea that's ever been had and handed to them.

Can't speak to the tax issues but, Republicans have wanted to dismantle the EPA for years. It's completed it Nixonian mandates -- probably about 1980 -- and has since gone about a tyrannically overreaching it's authority. It's a monster -- along the lines of the IRS -- that needs to be slain and tossed.

Seriously, CO2 is a toxin?

[Yonivore]

That won't happen. You know very little about the Supreme Court if you think they won't uphold that part.

Okay.

[ElNono]

Government willingly shutting down an unsustainable program?

[DMX7]

...Republicans have wanted to dismantle the EPA for years. It's completed it Nixonian mandates -- probably about 1980 -- and has since gone about a tyrannically overreaching it's authority. It's a monster -- along the lines of the IRS -- that needs to be slain and tossed.

Seriously, CO2 is a toxin?

Cap-and-Trade, yet another thing republicans were for before they were against.

[Yonivore]

Cap-and-Trade, yet another thing republicans were for before they were against.

Cap and Trade; yet another bad idea.