Sen. Max Baucus has punked the media time and again, and they’re still falling for it. He punked the New York Times again this weekend, and he’s still doing it.

For months the Times quoted Max Baucus saying things like "we’re getting close," or "we’re on schedule," or "we’re making progress" and "I expect an agreement."

But here’s the story: Max Baucus is the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, through which any measure to expand/reform health care that implicates the federal budget must pass. His job, assigned to him months ago, was to produce a Committee bill.

There is no Senate Finance Committee bill. Nothing has passed the Committee. There isn’t even a Gang of Six proposal. Max Baucus and his Gang of Six failed, just as those paying attention predicted. End of story.

The New York Times’ Robert Pear doesn’t report that story. Instead the Times lets Baucus hand them a list of features, including a proposal to tax insurance companies.

No one asked Max Baucus to produce his own personal proposal. No one. (In fact, Max Baucus’ staff already produced a White Paper last winter with proposals stronger than what he proposes now.) Max Baucus was supposed to deliver a Committee proposal and get it out of Senate Finance.

Any Senator can produce a list of preferred health refrom measures. So why should we care what’s in Max’s latest list of things he’s heard from his Gang of Six, when the Gang doesn’t support it?

The Times reports that Baucus’ list is the product of over a year of discussions. But that list could have been produced in an afternoon by any knowledgeable staff person from ideas proposed almost entirely outside Baucus’ Gang of Six process:

– The House and Senate HELP bills require insurers to offer three levels of basic and better coverage; Baucus’s contribution: offer coverage worse than all three levels. Insurers like that.

– House and Senate HELP bills limit the patient’s exposure to about 25 percent and limit out-of-pocket expenses; Baucus proposes to increase their exposure to more than 30 percent and raise their out-of-pocket expenses. Insurers wanted that.

– House and Senate HELP bills offer consumers in the exchange the choice of a public option. Baucus offers consumers no public choice. Insurers love that.

– House and Senate HELP bills provide substantial subsidies to help consumers purchase insurance; Baucus offers less. The insurers don’t care.

The Times story leads with Baucus’ proposal to tax insurance companies for high-end health insurance policies. The insurers will protest, but they know that if employers/individuals are willing to pay for high-end policies, the insurers can pass the costs through to their customers in higher premiums. Employers pay the premiums by diluting employee wages.

The idea or taxing insurers came from Schumer, Rockefeller and Kerry. It might help lower costs, and the concept could be a major revenue source. But Baucus proposes to raise a piddling $6 billion per year. We blow through way more than $6 billion in a month in Dick Cheney’s wars, and do nothing to pay for it. The mandates would allow insurers to get over a trillion dollars in new business in the next decade; they can easily pass through $6 billion/year in higher premiums. [Correction: The Hill clarifies there are two taxes; a small fee on insurers based on market share -- that's the $6 billion, and a larger tax on high-end policies that, according to an "insurance lobbyist," could raise as much as $200 billion over ten years.]

Max Baucus has wasted months while shining on everyone. And the Administration has wasted months and its own credibility waiting for/using Max Baucus and the Gang of Six. They failed. End of story.

More:
Marcy wonders if Rahm put a pod under Max’s bed. HELP!