Congress Critters Pay $35 Per Month 4 Insurance Premiums, Won't Consider Single Payer 4 Us

[stopbush]

I did some research. People in Congress pay about $35 a month in premiums to get their Gold Standard health insurance. They pay that because We The People are underwriting the real costs of their insurance.

Currently, my family of four has a premium of about $1300 per month. My employer pays my insurance premium of $560 per month. My wife and two kids are on her COBRA, which costs me $755 per month. That COBRA runs out at the end of July, which means I'll have to put the 3 of them on my insurance, which will cost me $900 per month. We really don't have an option as my wife had breast cancer surgery back in 2004 and she won't hit the "cured 5 years" mark until this fall, so it's pointless for me to shop around for a private plan because they'll all reject her for her pre-existing condition.

And our family is one of the lucky ones because we can at least afford to pay for insurance, even if that means we have to cut corners like crazy everywhere else.

It doesn't seem like Congress cares. And why should they? Our insurance coverage is probably costing us $800 a month more than it has any right to. That $800 comes back to those Congress Critters as political donations from the health insurance companies.

So, screw you, Congress, you fucking ELITES who don't give a rat's ass about the constituency you supposedly represent.

[OregonBlue]

1. I would love to see Kucinich or someone introduce a bill to take away Congress' healthcare and make

them buy their own coverage. They would suddenly be very pro public option.

[redqueen]

2. I thought someone had already done that.

If not, someone should.

[RufusTFirefly]

18. Former Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton did something similar in 2003

"Holding his nose, Dayton voted for the imperfect prescription medicine bill. But he also came up with a creative approach to show his contempt. He dropped an amendment he calls 'a taste of our own medicine' on the Senate floor. The amendment requires senators to receive prescription drug benefits no greater than those being proposed for senior citizens. It so happens the benefits proposed for seniors are drastically inferior to those currently enjoyed by our illustrious senators."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x2431

[SandWalker1984]

41. Don't stop there.....

....everyone who is a government employee getting government subsidized health insurance should be included in the bill. Let them all get their insurance in the "free market" like we do.

While you're at it. let's also do away with Medicaid and Medicare.

We the tax paying citizens are already forced to pay for a public health care option called Medicaid for 20 million undocumented immigrants, and now we, the same tax paying citizens, are going to be forced to pay for an expensive corporate-designed health insurance plan because we are told they don't have enough votes for an affordable public option for us????

Don't tell me that these corporate thugs on both sides of the aisle are't out to destroy what's left of the middle class in this country!

[Strong Atheist]

42. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[Indydem]

3. Run for congress, get elected, then you can get the perks.

This is not a fair comparison.

But, it is bullshit that insurance companies get to dick people over for pre-existing conditions. They need to pass a law to stop that shit.

[OregonBlue]

4. Wrong, why should they get such cushy treatment while they debate whether we have the right to a

public option that would reduce our costs to affordable rates? They are elitists. Take away their coverage, make them buy their own, then they will realize the value of what they have and what they want to deny us.

[havocmom]

5. Take away their cheap coverage, let them find out first hand what it really costs

They are like bush 41 at the grocery store - they have no idea what the realities of the issue are.

[OregonBlue]

6. Agreed. Clueless!!

[OregonBlue]

7. Oops, dupe.

[CreekDog]

23. It's not $35/month and it doesn't appear gold plated

the $151/month plan is a Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan where they argue with you over what's covered, where you pay deductibles, where you at times pay 20% copayments (in addition to deductibles).

[havocmom]

32. Thanks for clarifying. Thought $35 sounded mighty good

Sounds like simliar to coverage we have, but still a lot lower price. BUT, fact remains, they do not comprehend what most Americans deal with for coverage, or no coverage.

[Indydem]

9. What an assinine argument.

They make $174,000 a year. Do you really think having to pay $7,200 annually for a health insurance policy will make them think anything different? Thats just over 4% of their pay. I pay more than that for my water bill. It is not going to make them think twice.

Its a benefit of their job. Whatever your job or position is, you know the benefits going in, they just happen to luck out and get really nice health care. Just like GM and Ford employees.

[Romulox]

11. There's a certain personality type that will defend the privilege of their betters to the bitter end

I don't understand it. :shrug:

What is clear is that you've provided nothing like a persuasive argument for why one set of Americans should have access "gold plated" healthcare at the taxpayers' expense, and another group of Americans should be denied this same care.

[Indydem]

15. You are missing my point entirely.

I want single-payer health care. But the idea that punishing the people who make our laws is going to get that to happen is idiotic. They can afford great health coverage, without the benefits. They can pay for it out of pocket, just like you can. Their position in life makes that possible.

I want all Americans to have access to cheap and effective health care, but taking away the health care benefits of congress is not going to move that forward.

[bornskeptic]

34. Members of Congress have the same healthcare benefits as other Federal employees.

They have a choice of several coverage plans. The upper tier plans cost them more. All this complaining about healthcare benefits of members of Congress is just silly. My employer pays all of my premium, for a plan similar to the lower tier plans on the Federal employees' list of options. The Federal Government does contribute more to the coverage of spouses and children than my employer does. But why would I get jealous because members of Congress get a couple thousand more in benefits than I do? The $130,000 more in salary they get than I do seems a lot more significant.

[CreekDog]

37. you sound like that guy who complained that people's health insurance covered "hair transplants"

remember that guy? :crazy:

[redqueen]

14. We're their bosses, and we want to amend their healthcare package.

To bring it more in line with those that other companies offer.

Don't like it? Don't run for congress.

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. Frankly, it would have no impact.

Congresscritters get $174,000/yr. Paying their own insurance, even as much as $1,500/mo, would hardly dent their income, and make no difference to their lifestyle at all. And there is no way, if THEY get sick, the insurance companies would refuse to pay up.

The only way to work on their own self-interest is to convince them that if the country founders we will fucking drag them down with us.

[stopbush]

8. What do you mean it's not a fair comparison?

There are only 535 Congress people. Getting elected to enjoy such a perk is limited to a tiny, tiny percentage of the US population. They have great insurance at our expense. All I'm asking is that everybody in the country have the option of buying into their plan. If millions of Americans were on that plan it would work out for everybody.

And, BTW, that "perk" you mention is a perk that they vote for themselves, just like their pay raises. If we had the option of voting for our own pay raises and health insurance premiums at our jobs, we'd all put ourselves in the driver's seat as well.

Following your logic, if Congress voted to give themselves each a $1MM bonus at the end of each year just for being total assholes, that would be OK because "them's the perks."

[OregonBlue]

10. Exactly. You are right on!!

[Indydem]

13. Look, its terrible that you are getting the shaft on your health care.

But it is a damn-near-standard benefit for those with white collar professional jobs to get good health care. Your argument that you deserve the same benefits as those who have countless years of public service, unimaginable stress, regular threats against their family and life, and the general disdain of half the population is flawed.

Being a congress critter is a shit job where people hate you, the media taunts you, and the comedians lambaste you. People who volunteer to go through that hell deserve good health care, at the least.

[stopbush]

21. You might have a point if health care was the only perk they got,

but that truly is "the least of it."

Besides, having a shit job doesn't entitle you to shit on everybody else. Your description of the job of a Congressperson sounds exactly like that of a police officer, except for the part about the media taunting you and comedians lambasting you, and I don't know any police officer who makes as much as a Congressman nor who pays a measly $35-per-month as a premium. I also don't know a police officer who has security personnel assigned to him to keep him safe from attacks on his person.

You also ignore a basic fact: that single-payer WORKS spectacularly in every other civilized Western country, and that the main reason we don't have it here is because our Congress critters are beholden to their masters in the health profession who fund their political campaigns and help to keep them in their jobs. We don't have it here because our Congress people realize that it would pick their pockets when it comes to campaign cash. They realize that the largesse they receive from the health insurance industry would evaporate if private companies had to compete with single-payer, because the private guys would pull back on their campaign cash, at least until they were forced out of biz altogether.

Bottom line is that people would still hate Congress people if they went ahead and passed single payer. Bottom line is that Congress critters would still have their perks if they passed single payer for the rest of us. The only thing they wouldn't have would be the cash spigot that keeps 90% of incumbent Congress critters in their cushy "shit" jobs, jobs that to the rest of us hardly seem be shitty at all, as most Congress critters try to hang onto them for life.

[CreekDog]

27. why do you keep spreading a lie (the $35/month part)?

and the "gold plated" part?

I have sent you a PM that tells you what the coverage actually is and that it costs perhaps 10 times more than you are saying, yet you keep bloviating and spreading this lie.

[Orangepeel]

12. Do you have a cite for that $35? I thought they paid the same as other federal employees

Which is still a very, very good deal that many people would like to have, but more than that. For Blue Cross for example (I picked that because I've heard both Senator Kerry and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz say that's what they have), the federal employee monthly rate for a family is $356.59.

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/nonpostalffs2009.pdf

I know they have the same insurance options as other federal employees, but I'm not sure that they pay the same rates.

[Ocracoker16]

19. I don't see a premium as low as $35 a month listed on the OPM site

If you are interested you should go to that site. It has information on the health insurance options under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEBHP). These options are available to Congress as well as those employed by the government.

While the premiums may be more than $35, they are still a lot less expensive
than the premiums that people pay for a private health insurance policy. Taxpayers pay for 72% of the premiums paid by federal employees including Congress members. That leaves 18% to be paid by the government employees and congresspeople. I would say that is a very deep discount.

[Orangepeel]

20. that's what I said

I asked for a citation for the $35 claim because that's not consistent with what I thought was the case from reading the information on that site. I know that congresspeople choose from those options, but I don't know for a fact that they pay the same premium rates as other federal employees. If they don't, I would like to know that.

I am not trying to pretend that congresspeople don't get a good deal on health insurance. They absolutely do. But arguing with incorrect facts is not a good way to go about getting reform and either I or the OP are off by a factor of 10. I'd like to know which.

[stopbush]

26. Here's my citation:

"In an excerpt from his 2006 book, Practicing Medicine Without a License, Don Sloan, M.D., shows that members of Congress enjoy health coverage with unlimited doctor visits, no deductibles and no co-pays -- all for $35 a month."

The book was reviewed in 2007.

Article here: http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/56439/the_best_health_care_is_reserved_for_congress/

The doctor is retired and is an advocate for single-payer. Thought I should mention that as it may be a bias i his book.

[CreekDog]

35. That source doesn't cite a source

and that's important since he's actually quite wrong.

[CreekDog]

36. Consumer Reports also quotes my numbers, not yours

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/may-2009/health/health-insurance/does-your-plan-match-the-federal-standard/index.htm

So, who is right? :shrug:

"President Barack Obama says Americans should have access to the kind of health benefits Congress gets. We detail them below. Members of Congress and other U.S. government employees can receive care through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. Employees choose from hundreds of plans, but the most popular is a national Blue Cross and Blue Shield Preferred Provider Organization plan. Employee contributions for that plan are $152 per person, or $357 per family, per month. (source Consumer Reports)"

And your source is wrong about "no deductibes, no copayments, etc."

Out of pocket expenses can be up to $7,000 per year.

[Ocracoker16]

29. I thought I was replying to the OP, but apparently I clicked the reply button on your post

I agree with you 100% on this. I was so happy to see someone call the OP on the $35 a month premium that Congress supposededly enjoyed. You were correct about everything. My post had the same info as yours, because I was trying to validate what you said and draw additional attention to your post.

[Orangepeel]

39. Oh, okay. Thanks.

:hi:

[CreekDog]

25. I PM'ed the OP to tell them that and no response or correction thus far

Not that I'm expecting one.

I do not believe this person did any type of research and there is no link to anything backing up their claim anyway.

Just another uninformed person posting a lie and getting lots of recommends and kudos for doing so.

stay tuned! :crazy:

here are the 2009 FEHB premiums, i don't think there are any anywhere near $35/month and the cheapest ones are pretty crappy. a decent health plan will run a family around $300-$400/month in premiums that the individual must pay.

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/index.asp

[stopbush]

28. Stay tuned indeed. I offered a citation. Our posts probably crossed.

And I seldom check my PM's on DU.

On edit: I am more than open to the idea that this particular doctor's research and claims are faulty. If the evidence proves otherwise, I'm more than happy to accept it and revise my beliefs.

My thanks in advance to any and all who can issue a fact-based corrective to my OP.

[CreekDog]

30. "I did some research" is not a citation, especially when your conclusions are bogus

try again.

now find the "gold plated, $35/month plan on this list":

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/index.asp

[Ocracoker16]

33. Thank you for your efforts to try to get the OP to say that his $35 a month thing is not true

I don't understand why there have been multiple mentions of thw OPM site which you don't need to look at for very long to see that the premiums are more than $35 a month and there has been no correction.

[Bucky]

16. Nice tweet, Grassley

[rucky]

17. We need to challenge them to give up their public insurance, and purchase privately.

Like most of us do.

[CreekDog]

24. it's not public insurance, they are private plans offered to all federal employees

and the employee has to pay about 28% of the premium (the government pays the other 72%).

where did the myth of some super secret, gold plated health care plan only available to congresspeople come from?

in comparing plans i think the coverage is better and cheaper in state employees and employees of large private sector corporations.

[CreekDog]

22. WRONG...FEHB does not have premiums that only cost $35/month

The coverage that Joe Biden referred to as the plan he carries is Blue Cross/Blue Shield and costs $152/month for 1 person or $357/month for family coverage. This works out to about 28% of the total cost of the premium.

It's not gold plated coverage, it has deductibles, copayments, for many procedures it covers 80%, not 100% and so forth. It does not include dental and it does not include vision coverage.

It is the plan available to any federal employee at the same cost.

If you think it is gold plated, it is the largest health insurance plan in the country, carried by more people than any other --not just members of congress.

http://www.fepblue.org/

[Ocracoker16]

38. it is certainly not gold plated

My BCBS plan makes my family have to pay copays for visits to the doctor until we hit $5,000 and the benefits kick in. It works the same for prescription medicines.

Moreover, the FEHBP doesn't make people immune from the politics as usual approach from the insurance bureaucrats. They have refused to pay for some meds as well as procedures. Trying to fight the insurance company is a part time job.

You are so very right about what this supposed gold plated insurance is really like.

[Wednesdays]

40. K&R

:kick: