During Douglas Holtz-Eakin’s appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box yesterday, John Harwood questioned Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) ability to provide insurance for individuals whose pre-existing conditions disqualify them from coverage in the individual marketplace. Harwood argued that McCain’s proposal to federally subsidize high-risk pools to the tune of $7 to $10 billion is not “really adequate to get those at-risk into health insurance.” Holtz-Eakin begged to differ:

The Senator’s commitment was to devise a best practice…so his idea was let’s look at the practices, get the one that works and make the commitment to fund it. ‘Cause you know, in the end these are high-cost patients who might need more money. So his 7 to 10 estimate, it was a ballpark estimate. It could be higher. The commitment is to get the job done…It could be $20 billion and you could make it work if you do the rest of the reforms in the McCain plan. The important thing is to change the cost of care, and there’s a long list of reforms that the Senator’s proposed. It means changing incentives.

Watch it:

Holtz-Eakin is spinning his wheels as the McCain campaign scrambles to explain how their individual-market centric health care proposal would deliver health coverage to the millions of Americans with chronic illnesses.The McCain health care plan has been a patchwork of conflicting proposals from the very beginning:

- In April, Elizabeth Edwards, a Senior Fellow at The Center for American Progress Action Fund, astutely noted that McCain’s plan offered nothing for the sickest Americans.

- In response to her criticism, McCain offered his current high-risk pool enhancement plan, G.A.P.

- Seven days ago, senior adviser Carly Fiorina floated the idea of establishing “a nonprofit corporation that would contract with insurers” and “partner with other state plans to broaden insurance pools” and cover the sickest Americans.

Holtz-Eakin’s funding boost is the latest inadequate variation. As the Tax Policy Center pointed out, McCain’s high-risk pools would need about $100 billion a year to “prevent large losses in insurance coverage among the sick and needy.”

Implementing “the rest of the reforms in the McCain plan” would only overburden high-risk pools. As The Wonk Room previously pointed out, McCain’ plan to deregulate the insurance industry and push healthy Americans into the individual market could shift sick people — who can’t find coverage in the individual market or afford the increasing cost of insurance in their old risk pools once the healthy people have opted out — into high-risk pools.

These programs don’t spread risks and costs across a mixed pool population of healthy and sick people and would force millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions to pay astronomical insurance premiums and deductibles.

Thus, while McCain’s proposals have changed, his message has remained the same: don’t get sick.

Tomorrow, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who has long claimed that he has a “perfect record” on veterans issues, will address the Disabled Veterans of America convention in Nevada.

But McCain’s poor voting record on veterans issues and his proposal to contract-out veterans health care, have estranged many prominent veterans organizations.

McCain received a grade of D from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and a 20 percent vote rating from the Disabled Veterans of America; Vietnam Veterans of America noted McCain had “voted against us” in 15 “key votes.”

After McCain suggested that the Veterans Administration should ration health care by “concentrating” its efforts on “those wounds and disabilities that are directly the result of combat,” veterans organizations across America criticized McCain. Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, said McCain “appears to want to significantly narrow the number of veterans who can use VA, and that would alarm many veterans.”

McCain’s veterans health plan is no better than his record. According to veterans groups, the proposal — which would “give veterans the option to use a simple plastic card to receive timely and accessible care at a convenient location through a provider of their choosing” — may actually undermine veterans care.

According to The Independent Budget, a report published by AMVETS, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the Veterans
of Foreign Wars, contracting out health care for rural veterans on a broad scale would undermine the existing VA system, “a system of immense value to veterans”:

While some service-connected veterans might seek care in the private sector as a matter of personal convenience as a result of enactment of these vouchering and privatization bills, they would lose the many safeguards built into the VA system through its patient safety program, evidence-based medicine, electronic medical records, and bar code medication administration (BCMA). These unique VA features culminate in the highest quality care available, public or private. Loss of these safeguards, which are generally not available in private sector systems, would equate to diminished oversight and coordination of care, and, ultimately, may result in lower quality of care for those who deserve it most.