Health-Care Reform: A Tale of Two Chambers

Recs

9

Disney Buys Marvel!

David Gardner called it. He’s up 1,334%! See what David’s recommending that you buy NEXT.

Health-care reform is halfway to becoming a reality, with the passage of the House bill on Saturday. But the battle is just starting to heat up.

Without the procedural wrangling available to their colleagues in the Senate, House Republicans didn't have much bargaining power. The House Democrats didn't even need their entire party to get on board; 39 of them voted against the bill.

The difference in the need for compromise between the two chambers will make for one interesting show when lawmakers attempt to rectify the two bills in their current forms. Here's a look at the contentious topics, and how they might affect your pocketbook or portfolio.

Government-sponsored public option
House: The House bill provides for a public option that would compete with private health insurers.
Senate: The public plan is back as a possibility in the Senate, with the caveat that states would have the option to bow out of it.
Pocketbook or portfolio: It depends on whom you talk to. Health insurers like UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH) and WellPoint (NYSE: WLP) think a public option would cut into their profits. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the public plan would have premiums slightly higher than those of private insurers. So there may not be a huge benefit to your own finances, while owners of stock in health insurers may not see much pressure on margins.

Covering everyone
House: Employers with payrolls greater than $500,000 would be required to provide their workers with health insurance.
Senate: The Senate's version is a little more lenient; companies with more than 50 full-time employees would be required to pay a fee for workers who enter into a government-subsidized plan.
Pocketbook or portfolio: It might be about time to start looking into whether the companies you invest in offer health care to their employees. The requirement shouldn't affect larger companies like General Electric (NYSE: GE), Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG), or AT&T (NYSE: T), but it potentially could cut into profits of some small-cap stocks.

And I do mean everyone
House: The House bill requires everyone to have coverage, or face fines up to 2.5% of their income.
Senate: The Senate's version is considerably more lenient.
Pocketbook or portfolio: Companies like Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) and Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) could get a boost from the increased number of insured patients. Your insurance rates could also get a boost -- and not the good kind -- if the penalty to require coverage isn't strict enough. Since the bills require insurance companies to cover everyone regardless of preexisting conditions, there's incentive for individuals not to have coverage until they actually need it, which would ultimately drive up costs for those who have year-round coverage.

Paying for it all
House: A tax on those making $1 million a year, and another $20 billion over 10 years from medical device makers, covers some of the $1 trillion cost.
Senate: High-cost Cadillac plans will get taxed, as will some health-related services.
Pocketbook or portfolio: The high-wealth tax obviously depends on what your paycheck looks like these days. Unfortunately, this Fool is safe for now. The added taxes on health-care companies could cut into profits, but I predict most will be able to pass the added costs along in the form of increased prices. We'll be paying for the whole thing one way or another.

A long way to go
Keep in mind that the Senate hasn't introduced final legislation, and it's still waiting to hear back from the Congressional Budget Office on the final cost of its version of the bill. Even then, the proposed law could -- most likely will -- change during the debate, and a final bill may not be voted on until next year.

Then the real fun begins, as the two chambers try to meet each other halfway. Unfortunately, that means we're a long way from knowing how this will ultimately affect our own bottom lines.

What's the one thing you're most interested in seeing in the final bill? Let us know in the comments section, below.

“The Next Great Investment”… That’s how a top global investor describes India’s potential. On Nov. 28, The Motley Fool’s Tim Hanson returns to India to prove it. Follow along in real time and get his TOP pick first (Hanson returned from China in July with a stock that’s up 169%!). Enter email below.

UnitedHealth is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor pick. Pfizer, UnitedHealth, and WellPoint are Inside Value picks. Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble are Income Investor picks. Try any of our Foolish newsletters today, free for 30 days.

Fool contributor Brian Orelli, Ph.D., doesn't own shares of any company mentioned in this article. The Fool owns shares of UnitedHealth and Procter & Gamble. The Fool has a disclosure policy.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 8:21 PM, devoish wrote:

    Mandated coverage levels so people can know what they are overpaying for. The opt-out clause so States can go single payer if they choose, and some will. If it was just VT, no one would care. But it is also the worlds 6th largest economy that has twice voted in favor of Single payer and had their Governor veto the bill.

  • Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 8:50 PM, TDUBFISH313 wrote:

    I'm heavily weighted with my IRA in health care funds. Do you guys think health care reform will be good or bad for health care stocks?

  • Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 9:03 PM, DSL102 wrote:

    If this bill is so good for the citizens, why are members of Congress exempt? They have close to 10 high end plans from which to choose. If they are serious about changing our health care options, then they should INCLUDE themselves into the system and stop thinking of themselves as superior to their constituents.

    Also, the actual details of how this will work have yet to be determined--how does one vote on something that has yet to be defined?

    The tax for this little gem begins immediately, but the benefits do not begin until 2013. Why should we pay premiums for 2 years and not have coverage for those same 2 years? This makes no sense.

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 3:02 AM, bjmac02 wrote:

    1. Those that passed this law should be first to pay taxes, insure their staff (not the government) and pay all penalties x2 for 5 years before the public is subject to these same laws.

    2. Since they are cutting Medicare/Medicaid by 500, 000. The Salaries of the politicians should be cut first to ensure that seniors and those financially challenged citizens aren’t unduly hurt by this legislation.

    3. And if the medical community refuses to tend to the Medicaid and Medicare recipients that those in need should be treated by the doctors who would normally treat these politicians at the politicians’ expense.

    4. And finally, if illegal immigrants are granted medical treatment under this plan, any and all bills should go to the party that issued this legislation onto the American Citizens.

    We have a good medical care in the US. Insurance laws and tort reform should be dealt with first. And if there is 500 billion in fraud waste and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs they should be dealt with before any other changes are made.

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 10:45 AM, topsecret09 wrote:
  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:03 AM, topsecret09 wrote:
  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:08 AM, topsecret09 wrote:

    You heard It here first.... The AMERICAN PEOPLE will kill this bill. The time has come to say STOP IT, you have crossed the line. This bill was conceived and debated behind closed doors. Our government Is becoming a SECRETIVE STATE that Is devoted to SPECIAL INTERESTS. They had to pass this bill at 3 In the morning on a SUNDAY. What does that tell you? Wake up AMERICA before It Is too late .....

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:25 AM, topsecret09 wrote:
  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 12:01 PM, surfacescrub wrote:

    In my opinion as a healthcare worker, a government option will be detrimental to any company which provides direct healthcare to patients. This would include doctors, nurses, general hospital profitability, and private medical practices to name a few. I believe this because a "competitive" government option means cheaper insurance for individuals . . . great, right? Not entirely because it actually reinforces our current problem of patients themselves not controlling costs. Patients never see how expensive their services are, so there's no "shopping for deals" at the level of the patient. Therefore, there is no competition between providers to perform good care, there is only competition to attract a higher volume of patients to make up for the low reimbursements provided by medicare. The silver lining is that any company which does NOT provide direct care to patients but supplies those who DO will have a huge market as an increasing number of people go to the doctor for minor ailments. I'm looking to invest in electronic records and suppliers of diabetes and cardiac testing supplies.

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 5:04 PM, goldengoosen wrote:

    I support:

    * No public option. Ever. Take Medicare private.

    * Require everyone to carry insurance. Even illegal immigrants. Make the penalties really, really nasty.

    * Require all companies of any size to offer health insurance for their employees.

    * Get rid of state and fed requirements that keep insurance companies from competing across state lines.

    * No exclusions for pre-existing conditions (but only if everyone is required to be insured.)

    * Tort reform. Cap malpractice awards.

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 6:27 PM, twdonner wrote:

    remember we have a constitution and I dont see anywhere in that document where they can REQUIRE you to have and pay for anything!

  • Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 6:58 PM, babypoop wrote:

    Amazing. The government is going to demand that buy something or face a penalty on you income.

  • Report this Comment On November 11, 2009, at 7:25 PM, register2 wrote:

    Allow all insurers to cross state lines.

    include widespread taut reform.

    I'm not sure about pre-existing conditions. The medigap plan I have now charges $212 per month. Another company offered the same plan for $134. per month but I couldn't qualify because of a pre-existing condition. Change the law and you can bet both plans will be AT LEAST $212.

  • Report this Comment On November 16, 2009, at 11:18 PM, ravenchortle wrote:

    Single-payer advocate here. Everyone deserves knowing that quality health care is accessible to them. I like making money AND I appreciate having health care. They do not have to be mutually exclusive.

  • Report this Comment On November 17, 2009, at 12:38 AM, wrkdiver wrote:

    Hey Goldie -did you hear where Nancy Pelosi admitted that if you didn't buy the insurance, you could go to JAIL? That'll help the poor folks all right!

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 1038394, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/27/2009 8:58:58 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
The Fool Celebrates Banksgiving!

Related Tickers

11/27/2009 1:00 PM
JNJ $62.89 Down -0.41 -0.65%
Johnson & Johnson CAPS Rating: *****
PG $62.48 Down -0.39 -0.62%
The Procter & Gamb… CAPS Rating: *****
GE $15.94 Down -0.24 -1.48%
General Electric C… CAPS Rating: ****
PFE $18.25 Down -0.34 -1.83%
Pfizer, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****
T $26.99 Down -0.09 -0.33%
AT&T, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****
WLP $54.24 Down -0.86 -1.56%
WellPoint, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****
UNH $29.44 Down -0.10 -0.34%
UnitedHealth Group… CAPS Rating: *****

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Flowserve: Flowserve (NYSE: http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/FLS.aspx FLS) is a manufacturer and aftermarket service provider of comprehensive flow control systems.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!