I'm, uh, stunned that the GOP who have been flailing about, screeching, doing everything short of self flagellation on healthcare wouldn't opt out of what is essentially a public plan.

And the only one who has is a Dem and not even Ron Paul?

Are you trying to say the GOP look like a bunch of self involved dimwitted lying hypocritical whores? Cause I am.

Once a congressman reaches 65 (half probably already are) Medicare kicks in. In the "real world" seniors depend on "retirement policies" (if you’re lucky to have one) or supplemental polices (that they pay for each month) to pick up what Medicare does not cover.

Do congressmen who receive Medicare also get a "retirement policy" from the government? Double dipping with our tax dollar???

Not to forget all of the free Viagara and male enhancement pills on the RepuG side of the aisle.

Yes, the Dole Amendment stamped his legacy.

And the only one who has is a Dem and not even Ron Paul?

You'd expect Paul to "do as he says"? He's a hypocrite to the Libertarian ideology, but he's got a bunch of South Texans fooled.

"If every member of Congress put their heads on their pillow every night like I do ... knowing this could be the night I lose my house, we'd fix healthcare in a week," said Kagen.

And that is just the problem. A lot of Congress doesn't give a damn about how the other half lives.

Look the federal employee plan at $1000 per month for a family plan is the same as the average private employers provide. Recall, CBO and Kaiser estimate that a typical family plan is $12,700 and for singles its about $5,000. Thus, the chief difference between what federal employees get and those in the private workforce is the ability to choose among plans.

Perhaps we should eliminate health benefits for elected officials. Then they might be more responsive to our needs.

Your comments about the FEDS health insurance is hogwash. Blue Cross Blue Shield federal costs individuals $1500.00 per year. If you have the Family plan the costs are more around $3200.00 per year. Yes the Feds are picking up probably 50% of the tab (possibly higher) which means that the total price tab is somewhere around 6-7K for a family. How does that work out with all those Republicans talking about giving out 5K for people to buy the own health insurance. Now if they handed out 10-15K for people to buy their own health insurance while at the same time preventing the Health Insurers from discriminating against people with prior conditions, then the idiots would have a talking point. Also, for safety purposes there should be a built-in allowance for costs of insurance increases, which means the lump sum would continuously grow each and every year. Thus insurance for the 50 million uninsured should cost 20K+ per individual; that adds up to an even 1 trillion dollars(also ever increasing). Now what does that idiot Baucus say it will cost for health insurance reform?

Leveraging fear and loathing...

Fear is easy. There are plenty of horrific health care stories out there. Package a few of them up for tv delivery. Punch line: "There for the grace of God go I. Healthcare reform, it's time."

Loathing is even easier. From the LA Times story:

Voters sense a disconnect. A recent Gallup Poll found that about half of those surveyed said they have "a good understanding" of the issues involved in the healthcare debate. By contrast, respondents believe that fewer than three in 10 members of Congress share that understanding.

The Wisconsin Democrat has refused to accept federal healthcare benefits, making him the only member of Congress to do without...Kagen recently had knee surgery, writing checks for more than $4,500 after bargaining for a reduced-rate MRI and a 50% discount on the operation. (He is still dickering over the hospital bill.)

"If every member of Congress put their heads on their pillow every night like I do . . . knowing this could be the night I lose my house, we'd fix healthcare in a week,"

Put the heat, the onus, and the blame on Congress. Sure some Dems will fall in the midterms if this bill goes kaput. But so will many a smug Repub...

Verberne posted: "Your comments about the FEDS health insurance is hogwash. Blue Cross Blue Shield federal costs individuals $1500.00 per year. If you have the Family plan the costs are more around $3200.00 per year. Yes the Feds are picking up probably 50% of the tab (possibly higher) which means that the total price tab is somewhere around 6-7K for a family. How does that work out with all those Republicans talking about giving out 5K for people to buy the own health insurance. Now if they handed out 10-15K for people to buy their own health insurance while at the same time preventing the Health Insurers from discriminating against people with prior conditions, then the idiots would have a talking point. Also, for safety purposes there should be a built-in allowance for costs of insurance increases, which means the lump sum would continuously grow each and every year. Thus insurance for the 50 million uninsured should cost 20K+ per individual; that adds up to an even 1 trillion dollars(also ever increasing). Now what does that idiot Baucus say it will cost for health insurance reform?"

I have family federal employees health care insurance (Blue Cross/ Blue Shield). This year my premiums are $4264 while the fed govt pays > $9000. There are also annual deductibles (300/person) and pharmacy and doctor co-pays.

neutrino

Have you no sympathy, Libs, for the CEO of Blue Cross/Blue Shield? How else is that company going to meet the salary of over $872,000 for their Regence CEO in Oregon? While losing policy holders on the roll, they are not cutting the pay of executives, but, begging (and receiving) monthly fee increases from the state commission.

No matter if it was Ganz or Serota, the pay is going up for their "Stalwart" leadership.

Kagan should introduce a bill that would strip federal lawmakers from being allowed to accept taxpayer funded healthcare, on the basis that it represents an irreconcilable conflict of interest.

"Most federal workers go with a plan that costs about $1,030 a month, with taxpayers paying about $700 of the total. Employees pay $20 for a doctor's visit, and $10 for generic prescriptions, and there is no coverage limit."

"I have family federal employees health care insurance (Blue Cross/ Blue Shield). This year my premiums are $4264 while the fed govt pays > $9000. There are also annual deductibles (300/person) and pharmacy and doctor co-pays.
neutrino"

1. The difference between what neutrino pays and the average is about $25, no big deal.
2. As an American who's been living in France for quite a few years and is part of the French single-payer system, every time I see what US insurance costs plus the co-pays and the deductibles and the caps ... well, I don't know how to tell you how horrifying it all looks from over here.

Most basic medical care is mostly paid for out of the mandatory deductions (think: withholding taxes) that come out of monthly salaries. Of course, there are a few co-pays that are fairly recent (and are still considered to be outrageous). For example, going to your generalist will now cost you, out of pocket, 2 euros. Outrageous! Then again, the visit itself has recently increased to ... 22 euros.

Pre-existing conditions? Wazzat?
Lifetime limits? You kidding? Not here in Europe.
Refusing coverage? Unknown.

What is there to understand? Health care is NOT a privilege or a business like any other business, it's a basic human right. Is there any other basic human right that "we should just trust to the market place"? How much is your life worth?

I apologize for not knowing what the Blue Cross Blue Shield Family plan cost; all I was pointing out was that for even for Federal Workers and Retiree's the fact that they are paying out a considerable sum way above the ball park figures that the Republicans toss out as a way to fund health insurance - $5,000.00 when the real cost is 13-20K. When you consider that most congress-people and Senators make well above 100K per year, forking out $4264.00 per year along with the deductibles and the Pharmacy costs is manageable. Its a little harder for those not making that much money. Not everyone is a GS-14 or a member of the Senior Executive Service.

You know, I read that article yesterday and I was a little stymied by their math. They said the federal government spent 15 billion dollars to insure 8.5 million employees and their families... that's about 1800 dollars per family. Isn't that a LOT better than we're paying nationally?

Verberne posted: "I apologize for not knowing what the Blue Cross Blue Shield Family plan cost; all I was pointing out was that for even for Federal Workers and Retiree's the fact that they are paying out a considerable sum way above the ball park figures that the Republicans toss out as a way to fund health insurance - $5,000.00 when the real cost is 13-20K. When you consider that most congress-people and Senators make well above 100K per year, forking out $4264.00 per year along with the deductibles and the Pharmacy costs is manageable. Its a little harder for those not making that much money. Not everyone is a GS-14 or a member of the Senior Executive Service."

I listed my numbers because they do illustrate the gap between rhetoric and reality. On the one hand, Republicans mention that Americans are generally happy with their current health coverage (if they have it) which currently costs 13-20 K a year for family care. On the other hand, they are offering vouchers, etc. of about 5K for those famillies not able to afford coverage. What kind of coverage will be available for ~5K? I don't know but it won't be that which Americans are supposedly happy with. There is also a lot of hand waving on how cost savings will improve 5K/ family coverage, but the previous record on such is dubious.

neutrino

Total Government Employment Since 1962 1
(numbers in thousands)

Year Executive branch civilians (thousands) Uniformed military personnel (thousands) Legislative and judicial branch personnel (thousands) Total Federal personnel (thousands)
1962 2,485 2,840 30 5,354
1963 2 2,498 2,732 30 5,260
1964 2 2,470 2,719 31 5,220
1965 2,496 2,687 32 5,215
1966 2,726 3,129 33 5,888
1967 2,968 3,413 34 6,416
1968 3,020 3,584 35 6,639
1969 3 3,040 3,499 36 6,575
1970 4 2,944 3,104 38 6,085
1971 4 2,883 2,752 40 5,675
1972 2,823 2,360 42 5,225
1973 2,781 2,289 44 5,113
1974 2,847 2,198 46 5,091
1975 2,848 2,164 49 5,061
1976 2,833 2,119 50 5,002
1977 2,840 2,112 53 5,005
1978 2,875 2,099 55 5,028
1979 2,823 2,063 53 4,939
1980 4 2,821 2,090 55 4,965
1981 4 2,806 2,122 54 4,982
1982 2,770 2,147 55 4,972
1983 2,820 2,163 56 5,039
1984 2,854 2,178 56 5,088
1985 3,008 2,190 58 5,256
1986 2,966 2,206 55 5,228
1987 3,030 2,213 58 5,301
1988 3,054 2,176 59 5,289
1989 3,064 2,168 60 5,292
1990 4 3,067 2,106 61 5,234
1991 4 3,048 2,040 64 5,152
1992 3,017 1,848 66 4,931
1993 2,947 1,744 66 4,758
1994 2,908 1,648 63 4,620
1995 2,858 1,555 62 4,475
1996 2,786 1,507 61 4,354
1997 2,725 1,439 62 4,226
1998 2,727 1,407 62 4,196
1999 2,687 1,386 63 4,135
2000 4 2,639 1,426 63 4,129
2001 4 2,640 1,428 64 4,132
2002 2,630 1,456 66 4,152
2003 2,666 1,478 65 4,210
2004 2,650 1,473 64 4,187
2005 2,636 1,436 65 4,138
2006 2,637 1,432 63 4,133
2007 2,636 1,427 63 4,127
2008 2,692 1,450 64 4,206

What 8.5 million federal workers?

The one statistic that sticks out like a sore thumb:

ONE GUY, a Democratic Congressman from Wisconsin has opted out of the socialized health insurance provided by the taxpayers. ONE GUY!

So every Republican member of Congress is using taxpayer funded Socialized Health Insurance.

And no BS about it being "employer provided" health care. I and every other tax payer are their employers, paying both their salary and their health care with TAX DOLLARS. This is NOTHING BUT SOCIALIZED HEALTH CARE!

so it sounds like federal employees arent on a public plan at all. they are on private group insurance plans that happen to be heavily subsidized by the employer, the federal govt. thats not at all the same thing as a public plan.

Employees who work for federal agencies get Blue Cross plans--private group insurance funded for the most part by the federal government. Employee pays a small part of this.

I have been saying this for a long, long time and will say it again...

If we want Congress to reform healthcare, taxpayers should take away all their health benefits. Let them experience the pleasure of losing their healthcare and finding a replacement plan. Then stand back and watch how quickly American healthcare reform gets passed.

Obama should have just said, when it comes to health insurance let them eat cake. He's an elitest....shocking, a politician who thinks he/she is better than the common man.

Employees pay $20 for a doctor's visit [...] -- Steve Benen

That's what people pay at our "Free" Clinic, most of the time, too (some can get a waiver. They still have to prepay, but get their money returned, when they show up for their scheduled appt). And these are people who are either at poverty level ($10,830 for a single, according to my handy chart which was given to me when I started to volunteer), and up to 200% ($21,660 for a single). The pay goes up, when you earn more than that (we accept patients up to 400% -- $43,320 for a family of one). The congresscritters are paid what? $165,000?

"What 8.5 million federal workers?" verberne @ 1:18 PM.
The complete quote from the story is: "taxpayers spent about $15 billion last year to insure 8.5 million federal workers and their dependents, including postal workers...".
Note the inclusion of "and their dependents". I would also imagine that dependents of postal workers are also included.
That works out to $1,764.71 (rounded up) per PERSON! Multiply by 310 million and it would cost $548 billion to insure every single person in the United States using the plans available to Federal employees.
So, tell me: who works for who?

The LA Times story didn't say - do federal lawmakers get to keep their FEBP when they leave office? Or do they have to keep getting re-elected in order to have insurance? I always wondered why re-election was the be-all-and-end-all.

Kagen is not the only one. Sen. Sherrod Brown (OH) also always refused the Federal coverage for the same reason.

It would be a nice piece of political theatre to have someone in Congress introduce legislation that mandated that the members of congress had to get insurance from the plans available in their home states but that they'd be given $5000 to buy it!

Whoever introduced it could then point out how many choices (usually no more than 3) and what kind of coverage $5000 would buy. It would be particularly nice to pick out, say, Nebraska, Indiana, and Maine for illustrative purposes.

Color me confused.

The LA Times reported, according to your article:

In all, taxpayers spent about $15 billion last year to insure 8.5 million federal workers and their dependents, including postal service employees, according to the Office of Personnel Management.

Then you write: To make this kind of plan available to the whole country would cost exorbitant sums, without major cost-cutting reforms.

Do the math. For 8.5 million people to cost 15B works out to a cost factor of $1,750/federal employee. Ok. So multiply $1,750 X US population of approximately 300-350 Million and you only get to 615 Billion dollars. That's a fucking bargain. Where do I sign up? So what is this talk about a 1 trillion dollar plan. If it means that there are no deductibles or copays or premiums, I still say, where to I sign up.

People seem to forget, because no one reminds them--sure your taxes will go up, but what you pay in insurance premiums will go down, way down.

Heck, they could probably pay for it by taxing the richest 100 people in the country.

Hey, that's MY Congressman! (Kagen, that is.) He ran in 2006 on a platform promising to work on health care, and it sounds like he's trying to deliver. He's the ONE guy in Congress that I don't worry about which way he's going to vote on health care issues.

How do you figure taxpayers only pay $700 out of $1030? Every govt. employee is covered 100% by taxpayers because we pay their salaries.

I don't get these numbers.

You say that taxpayers pick up about $700 per month for each government worker. That's $8400 per year per worker.

But the LAT quote says that taxpayers spent about $15 billion last year to insure 8.5 federal employees. That works out to something under $2000/year per employee.

Am I missing something?