http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/10/02/kip-sullivan-letter/by Kip Sullivan, JD
October 2, 2009
Douglas W. Elmendorf
Congressional Budget Office
US Congress
Washington, DC 20515-6925
Dear Mr. Elmendorf:
I write to ask for information about the methodology the CBO used to analyze the impact of the public plan (“public option”) in the Affordable Health Choices Act (drafted by the Senate health committee) and HR 3200 (drafted by three committee chairs in the House), and the health insurance cooperatives in America’s Healthy Future Act (drafted by Sen. Max Baucus). The CBO’s discussion of the public plan called for by the Senate health committee bill and HR 3200 assumes the public plan would be available throughout the country. In contrast, CBO’s discussion of the health insurance co-operatives called for by the Baucus bill assumes the co-ops would be unlikely to thrive, or even survive, in many parts of the country.
I can find no information that indicates what evidence, if any, CBO used to reach these conclusions. My statement is based on five letters from you:
....Members of Congress and the CBO cannot assume that entry into all or most of today’s health insurance markets is automatic or even feasible. Proponents of any proposal that relies on that assumption have an obligation to explain and document their assumption. To my knowledge, that has not been done. I realize the failure of the proponents of the “option” and co-ops to document that assumption makes CBO’s job very difficult. Nevertheless, I believe CBO has an obligation to call attention to the barriers the Secretary of HHS and the co-ops will face in trying to create new insurance plans and to attempt to determine whether those barriers can be overcome.
To remain silent about those barriers – to assume them away without notifying the recipients of your letters that that’s what you’ve done – strikes me as a substantial deviation from CBO’s standards."Sincerely,
Kip Sullivan, JD