Kent Conrad’s talking point against the public option tied to Medicare rates is that it would destroy the health care system in his state of North Dakota. He’s said this before, in interviews with Ezra Klein among others. And he always makes this point, one of the silliest I’ve ever heard from a Senator, which he repeated today in the Senate Finance Committee:
The public option as defined by the committee of jurisdiction in the House, the Ways and Means Committee, is tied to Medicare levels of reimbursement. My state has the second-lowest level of Medicare reimbursement in the country. If my state is tied to that reimbursement, every hospital goes broke.
People say, “Just fix it.” I’ve been on the Finance Committee more than 15 years. I’ve been trying to fix the unfair aspects of Medicare reimbursement all the time. We run into the House. Membership is determined by population, and the big population states write levels of reimbursement that unfairly treat hospitals in states like mine. My hospitals get one-half as much as urban hospitals to treat the same illnesses.
The way he termed it today, Conrad said that high-population states have a “disproportionate representation” in the House of Representatives.
OK, so North Dakota has an estimated population of 641,000 as of 2008. They have the same representation in the Senate as California, with its population of 36,756,666.
According to Conrad, this is the way it should be.
To the extent that any state has a disproportionate representation in the US House, it’s… small states like Conrad’s. Their 2000 population was 641,000. In 2000, the Census set the average size of a Congressional district at 646,000. Meaning that the Congressional district made up of the state of North Dakota is smaller than the average Congressional district.
Conrad is welcome to make the argument about Medicare reimbursement rates, but in order to do that he argues that, essentially, the US government should base its representation totals on acreage and not people.
Conrad is considered a very serious person in Washington.
Related posts:
- Kent Conrad Calls Blue Cross/Blue Shield North Dakota “Irresponsible”
- Kent Conrad: France’s Health Care “Not Government-Run”
- Kent Conrad: “Good Chance” Public Option is Dead in the Senate
- Sen. Kent Conrad Proposes Yet Another Way to Kill a Public Health Option
- Rikyrah: Opt-Out States Are “Where the Majority of the Black Population in This Country Lives”
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
How many Reps do they have? One, I presume?
btw, Sen. Very-Serious-Conrad might want to look up the meaning of “disproportionate.”
I think it means the opposite of what he thinks it means…..
Oh, and is anyone else having trouble getting on to FDL the last couple of hours? I kept getting ‘broken link’ messages on refresh since 2 threads ago. Finally successful!
Oh, doling out congressional seats by area probably still wouldn’t satisfy Conrad, as North Dakota is only 19th.
Conrad’s considered a crybaby in Elliott Town
Speaking personally, I’d be just fine with California or New York having, say four senators with N.D. having only one.
It’s that pesky Constitution again, causing problems to this day…
Yeah, it’s hinky. Been coming & going. Think they did some backstage work a day or so ago, and it seems to have introduced some gremlins.
you got a sheriff there in Elliottown?
What the House should do is fix the Medicare rate formula to deal with the issue he raises. Call his bluff. And then see if he has another excuse for not supporting the public option.
Otherwise, the answer is for North Dakota to start recruiting population instead of losing population. That would get them more representatives.
eh-yep
You’re talking to The Sheriff, The Mayor, and The Chief Bottle Washer.
If Elliottown were a state, you’d have 2 senators and 1 rep all for yourself.
oh – well ok then.
I was gonna say that I was ready, willing, able, and armed with a Super-Soaker fulla grape juice, but as long as you have it covered….
P.S. site acting funny for anyone else?
Think by now there are more buffalo than people in ND. Perhaps Conrad thinks the buffalo should be included in the census.
See my 6.
I blame a lot of urban problems on the lack of a Chief Bottle Washer.
And still people think that I’m not a Serious Person.
whaddya gonna do?
They only count as 2/5 of a person….
*clears throat”
“Cuppa joe and a slice’a'that apple pie, hon…”
*runs like hell*
thank you. My sense of personal paranoia is never far away… *g*
Pretending I’ve been asleep for the last few years, would someone be so kind as to define “medicare levels of reimbursement.”
What are the factors that determine medicare levels of reimbursement for North Dakota?
newton! how do I clear the cache on Windows XP?
Here’s how:
Walk down the street and find somebody who knows the first thing about dinosaurs – they will surely know.
The world’s largest buffalo is in Jamestown, ND.
In part, cost in the area – that’s why NY tends to be higher.
Not saying reimbursement levels are at proper levels – but chances are good that costs in ND are lower than Cali.
OTOH, when I found myself in a rural area some years ago, I was surprised what turned out to be expensive. Still…bet real estate prices are a lot lower than in Cali or NY or MA.
All right.
This may take a while, though.
I’m hanging up my Mac-Consultant stripes right now.
Ooh – calling Blue Texan – Olbermann says Rachel (or her show if she’s still sick) will be covering Rick Perry’s behavior in the execution case that he’s now prevenitng the Forensic Sci Commission from investigating.
The story’s getting legs…
If North Dakota was that great of a State and the health care system was so attractive then why aren’t there more people there?
:-)
Talk about the lesser of two evils – chucking Goodhair for KBHutch?
I can’t wait to see them tear themselves and their party to shreds.
I think I figgered it out.
Just a few stories about walking to school in the winter (as I heard from a ND raised friend long ago) might be the problem…lots of ducking into buildings along the way just to get out of the wind…Cold, cold, cold.
Wasn’t there a movie about ND & cold?
hey, if Kent wants DiFi I’m more than happy to let her go…
We gotta get rid of the electoral college
ND has one Rep…since 1973…when they had two. The problem is that they have lost population to other states increasing population. And because there is a fixed number of Reps in the House the states with the higher “surplus numbers” get the first dibbs on the additional representatives.
Proportionate usually means “distributed evenly by individuals”…i.e. by population. Somehow Conrad flunked basic math, methinks.
Good point – great recruiting tool for the state, hmm?
Fargo?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fargo_%28film%29
(edited word salad)
assuming you aren’t just funnin w/newt:
go to:
internet options
general
temporary internet files
then (if you wish):
delete cookies
delete files
clear history
The Dakotas are interesting States; Dorgan-another Dem Senator from N.Dakota-seems almost an anti-thesis of Conrad. I’m wondering if he ,also, is considered “a very serious person”.
S.Dakota has some fascinating history that-from a financial point of view- started when the Federal usury laws were repealed. (about halfway down the page)
And N.Dakota is FULL of credit card processing companies.
But back to the Constitution:
“The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the state of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three. ” ; 646,000 is a VERY LONG WAY from ‘one for every thirty thousand people’.
As toward the Senate:
The Senate is much given to admiring in its members a superiority less obvious or quite invisible to outsiders.- Henry Brooks Adams
“A century ago, muckraking journalists reported that large corporations and other wealthy interests virtually owned the United States Senate — using bribery, fraud and sometimes blackmail to get their way. Jokes were made about “the senator from Union Pacific” or “the senator from Standard Oil.”
One reporter in particular was out to break their grip. His name was David Graham Phillips. One day in 1906, readers of Cosmopolitan magazine opened its March issue to discover the first of nine articles by Phillips titled “The Treason of the Senate.”
He wrote, “Treason is a strong word, but not too strong, rather too weak, to characterize the situation which the Senate is the eager, resourceful, indefatigable agent of interests as hostile to the American people as any invading army could be, and vastly more dangerous: interests that manipulate the prosperity produced by all, so that it heaps up riches for the few; interests whose growth and power can only mean the degradation of the people, of the educated into sycophants, of the masses toward serfdom.”
The public outrage provoked by Phillips and other muckrakers contributed to the ratification of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, providing for the direct popular election of senators, who until then were elected by easily bought-off state legislators.
Of course, like water seeking its own level, big money finds its way around every obstacle, and was soon up to its old tricks, filling the pockets of sympathetic and grateful politicians.
Today, none dare call it treason. So why not call it what it is — a friendly takeover of government, a leveraged buyout of democracy.
Outrageous? You bet. But don’t just get mad. Get busy.”
From here
thank you. That wasn’t what I figgered out at all. Will try.
You could always use the ‘help’ button. *G* ubuntu !!
You are hereby officially pinned as Deputy.
But, bring your own supersoaker.
baiting newt?! perish the thought!
Yes, I was just reading the wiki & turns out the plot mostly took place in Minnesota, except for a small part at the beginning & the end. Here’s why they titled it Fargo:
blergh (h/t reddhedd)
Cool! I never travel anywhere without the Super-Soaker, buy grape juice in bulk, and have a gigondous holster.
I want a big-ass badge.
Fargo already meant coooooooold to me – my dad used to travel around the country visiting his company’s offices — once, he had to visit Fargo in winter. There was always lots of hilarity and mock-shivering whenever he mentioned having to go to Fargo.
Eli is upstairs!
Steele This Website
But – I haven’t gotten a reply yet for my demand for a big-ass badge….
oh, all right.
Hm Schumer on TRMS talking about P.O., and getting Reid to put it in the bill in committee.
Oh, no….now he’s talking about the opt-out! As a good thing!!!
I know there’s not much point in trying to address Conrad with data but does anyone know if there is any data on how BCBS or other insurance company reimbursement rates vary by state? My bet is they vary in pretty much the same way as the Medicare rate but it would be interesting to find some data on this. Anyone know a resource on this?
There may be a far better and easier way.
I struggle and have gone to Opera 10, which I adore. It’s a miracle for slow connections.
“he way he termed it today, Conrad said that high-population states have a “disproportionate representation” in the House of Representatives.
[...] They have the same representation in the Senate as California”
I don’t understand this argument. I don’t agree with Conrad, but it appears he was talking specifically about the House, not the Senate, in his complaint.
First off, since I’m from ND I’d like to apologize for Kent Conrad being the senator from ND.
With his convoluted logic, it really looks like he is the pocket of larger financial interests.
As for having equal representation in the Senate…I make no apology. It takes the edge off the tyranny of the majority.
Last time I looked, my congressional district (CA-04) didn’t have two US senators of its very own.
hahahahahahaha
hmm, never tried Opera — I’m Foxy, FireFoxy.
Why not look into whether Conrad has a point about Medicare inequitable reimbursement rates so that his objections to Medicare for All, or tying reimbursements to Medicare rates, might be resolved?
Politics is the mathematics of addition, not subtraction.
I mean seriously, couldn’t we give every resident of both Dakotas and Nebraska a gold brick to take the pressure off of those Senators who hesitate to support a Public Option and still come out ahead financially over time?
Well, yes, if you count the cows.
Croak!
Now that we’ve had our fun with the demographically challenged Sen. Conrad, consider what he’s actually saying, and what it means for the Obama Administration’s political approach.
fixing rural medicare rates is an easy deal to make, if the return is solid support for a real public option. Conrad and rural Senators have been whining about this for years.
There’s no reporting at all to suggest that the Administration went to him and said, hey Kent, we want a real public option and need your vote. Now your real estate and underlying costs are cheaper than urban areas, so there’s never going to be 100% parity, but yeah, your Medicare rates are too low, so let’s find a number that keeps you happy in return for support.
Talking about being slow on the uptake. It’s only now that I realized you’re dday. I’ve been looking for a separate heading up top.
Welcome!
Hear, hear.
It’s easy to poke fun at ridiculous comments, but the OP seems to be exaggerating the instance, here — and ignoring the Senator’s complaint.
“the big population states write levels of reimbursement that unfairly treat hospitals in states like mine”
Conrad feels that the big states are using their power to stiff the smaller states.
I’ve heard this a few times during the last few months, but it’s yet another of the health care topics never really covered in the MSM, and I haven’t taken/found the time to research it, myself. And so I don’t know whether Conrad is rationalizing his opposition to a public option or being truthful.
wadda:
> “As for having equal representation in the Senate…I make no apology. It takes the edge off the tyranny of the majority.”
Replacing it, apparently, with a tyranny of the minority — especially when the imbalance is also factored in to the Presidential elections.
Bill Maher may have a point.
Kudos for attempting to have a substantive discussion. Unfortunately, I’m looking for similar information, so can’t help you. (but am eagerly awaiting someone addressing the substance of Conrad’s complaint, rather than superficially criticizing him)
But once you go down the road of trying to make the Senate more proportionally representative of the population, the Senate approaches becoming fully redundant to the House.
And, yes, changing the Constitution to adjust Senate apportionment would be nearly impossible. You’d have better results, I’d say, gathering up a few hundred thousand progressives, and moving to one of these small states — effectively taking over the government, and flipping two Senators to fully progressive.