Thread by @CitizenCohn

What if you like the sound of Medicare for All, but worry it's too big a lift right now -- as politics, policy, or both?

This plan may be for you. (1)

huffpost.com/entry/deluaro-…

It has a lot in common with two proposals that have been in circulation for a while.

One from @amprog americanprogress.org/issues/healthc…

And one from @JonWalkerDC shadowproof.com/2017/07/24/her… (2)

The basic concept is to create a new, government-run plan that will absorb existing federal programs, while allowing large employers to keep offering benefits.

Employees would then get a choice: Stay with the company plan, or enroll in the new government program. (3)

The proposal would also preserve Medicare Advantage.

That's the private insurance option that already exists within Medicare & currently enrolls roughly 1/3 of seniors. Under the new proposal, it'd be available to people of all ages, though under tighter regulation. (4)

The coverage in "Medicare for America," as sponsors @RosaDeLauro & @JanSchakowsky call it, would be a lot more generous than standard ACA policies, though still less generous than what the @BernieSanders bill would offer. (5)

In this new bill, government would get a lot more involved in regulating prices -- not just for drugs but for doctor and hospitals too.

Again, much like "Medicare for All" would do, though less aggressively and less directly. (6)

Basically, this bill is an effort to find a middle path to universal coverage.

It's more ambitious than modest expansions of Medicare or Medicaid, but less ambitious than "Medicare for All."

For better or worse, depending on your perspective. (7)

My piece doesn't talk much about the fiscal implications (didn't want to overwhelm!) but this bill requires less federal spending than "Medicare for All" -- chiefly bc the federal government wouldn't absorb as many individual health expenses. Again, for better or worse. (8)

Here's a @larry_levitt thread about those kinds of tradeoffs

https://twitter.com/larry_levitt/status/1096891657121783808

(9)

One last thing: A striking feature of the @rosadelauro @janschakowsky bill is its detailed attention to long-term services and support.

That's no accident. The lawmakers worked closely with disability community, which has offered strong praise for the final product. (10)

@rosadelauro @janschakowsky Long-term care is a big crisis that is getting bigger, as anybody who's dealt with that world can attest personally.

But many reformers have shied away from addressing it head-on because the task is so daunting and expensive.

@rosadelauro & @janschakowsky didn't. (11)

@rosadelauro @janschakowsky And now, a little more background reading...

DeLauro-Schakowsky bill didn't get much attention when it came out. One of the few people to write about it was @charles_gaba -- you can read his full entry here (12) acasignups.net/19/02/05/updat…

The @amprog plan, which was a rough template for DeLauro-Schakowsky, is among those @dylanlscott & @sarahkliff analyzed in their round-up.

(If you care about health care & haven't bookmarked that article already, you're doing it wrong.) (13) vox.com/2018/12/13/181…

@amprog @dylanlscott @sarahkliff Also, the summary of DeLauro-Schakowsky that @xpostfactoid gives at the beginning of this item xpostfactoid.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-ch… is really good.

Like, I wish I'd summarized it that cleanly.