Baucus To Release Health Care Bill Tomorrow

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 18:00


Senator Max Baucus will release a draft of the Finance Committee's health care tomorrow.  This is in accordance with the schedule for the Finance Committee to mark-up, and likely vote on, the bill next week:

The Senate Finance Committee should have a draft of their health care reform bill tomorrow, chair Max Baucus (D-MT) said in a news conference today.

Baucus said markup hearings -- where the committee will discuss amendments and details -- will be held next week.

"We're on schedule," he said.

The bill will not include a public option. It will not even include a trigger. Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, who had been pushing the trigger for a while, has given up on the trigger herself:

But this morning on CBS's Face The Nation, Snowe suggested that a 'trigger' did not generate any bipartisan support. "It's not on the table and it won't be," in the final Senate Finance Committee bill, Snowe said. "We'll be using the co-op as an option at this point as a means for injecting competition in the process."

Snowe's Maine colleague, Susan Collins, explains that triggers have been dropped because they might have actually led to a public option:

"The problem with the trigger is that it just delays the public option, because the people who are going to be making the determination about whether the market is competitive enough want the public option. So I think the trigger is just a delay."

Well, at least Collins is being honest about it. Snowe had been saying that she opposed public options, but supported a trigger. The only way that would make sense is if she supported a trigger that would never fire.

Big PhRMA is going to spend $150 million in paid advertisements supporting the Baucus bill and its co-ops:

According to the New York Times, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America will spend $150 million specifically boosting for the health care reform proposal introduced last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT).

So, it appears that we are getting change Susan Collins and PhRMA can believe in.

No matter what happens in the Finance committee, it is essential that there is a vote on health care reform with a robust public option on the floor of the Senate. If Democratic Senators can keep saying that their aren't enough votes to pass a public option, and if they aren't going to include on in their health care "reform" package, then at the very least they should have the decency to tell us which Democratic Senators were actually opposed to the public option.

We are the activists who worked our asses off to give them their majority. If they are going to not deliver on the hopes and dreams we had that led us to do that activism on their behalf, then they better damn well tell us who canceled the delivery.  No more of this code of silence crap that is designed to try and play both sides. They have to stand up, in public, and make it clear which side they are on--the American people's, or the private insurance companies.  We need a Senate roll call vote.

Chris Bowers :: Baucus To Release Health Care Bill Tomorrow

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Can't the Democratic Members of the committee (4.00 / 2)
add the public option as an amendment in the mark up?  You don't have to depend on the gang of sicks.  Democrats have majority on the committee, can we count on them?

Radical Centerist

Yes, if it has the votes (4.00 / 1)
This would be the part where Kerry, Rockefeller, Menendez, Schumer or Stabenow put their money where their mouth is and propose the public option during markup.  

[ Parent ]
Baucus and the Gang of 6 (4.00 / 1)
will vote it down.  We need the bill out of the Baucus committee.  The odds are better in the whole senate.  

[ Parent ]
so let them vote it down (4.00 / 2)
the amendment I mean, and if it passes and it can't get out of committee, strip it from the bill, at least we can say we tried and put them on the record.

If it passes during markup, the bill will get out of committee.  


[ Parent ]
And remeber this is a not a final stage, this a delayed commitee report (0.00 / 0)
necessary it to pass out of cmtte, possible to ignore on the floor.

This commtte does not make the final bill, if anything, some symbolic action like DTOzone suggests might just be the best thing to do.
I will leave that to the PR people.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Bad membership (0.00 / 0)
The 23 members include 13 Democrats and 10 Republicans but the 13 include Baucus, Conrad, Blanche Lincoln, Bill Nelson and Tom Carper.  At best, there are only 8 votes for a good bill on this committee.  

[ Parent ]
Better Negotiator (4.00 / 4)
It seems Snowe isn't so much a hypocrite as a good negotiator.  Apparently she is still "open" to the idea of a trigger, but wouldn't support one in committee.  This, she leaves the trigger open as a compromise, which is all she ever claimed it was.

Compare this to most Democrats who compromise first and then don't understand why their compromise is getting compromised, and I think you'll agree Snowe got it right.  (You know, in a wrong sort of way.)


Harkin said (4.00 / 5)
the PO could pass the Senaye if Obama and the leadership tried to round up votes, but they're not going to, so yeah, force Sens to expose their corruption.

Harkin also said... (4.00 / 4)

 ...that we would get a "strong public option" in the bill the Senate delivers to Obama. By Christmas.

 Harkin is one of the good guys, usually. So I don't know.

 I believe that if Obama really wants a public option, he'll get it. I'm unconvinced he really wants one. He's still paying more heed to Glenn Beck than to those who voted for him.

 

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn


[ Parent ]
There WILL BE , not may be, not could, not it might (0.00 / 0)
THERE WILL BE a reform package as described, with a real PO, and probably more still.

I think the final version will allow states single payer, and will have interim coverage until 2013 when it is set up and ready to go. If there are other regulatory additions, if there are other enablers like states right to single payer, they should be being pressed now, we have weeks now for the final negotiations leading to 51% or 50% plus Biden

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
If "passing the Senate" means getting 60 votes, (0.00 / 0)
then I don't see how it could happen, no matter how much Obama tries to round up votes. Lieberman and Nelson, and likely others, would never let that happen.

If it is a question of rounding up votes to get to 50, that is at least a possibility. Will Obama go all out to do it? He clearly realizes from recent statements that he will "own" whatever passes, and will suffer the consequences if the bill turns out to be a failure with the public. So I think it likely that he has a plan to get this to a budget reconciliation vote.

I think he is playing a real chess game at this point (involving the House as well as the Senate). Obama insisting on a public option at this time might not be the best strategy for actually getting one.  


[ Parent ]
Getting them to vote for cloture is different (4.00 / 1)
and quite possibly doable, with suitable arm-twisting. For cloture, against the bill is a reasonable vote (and used to be fairly common). Politically they can cover themselves because they "voted against the bill". There could still be an issue with those who have been personally corrupted by the health insurance biz, especially Evan Bought, I mean Bayh, of the wife with the cushy health insurance exec job.

[ Parent ]
It's taken until tomorrow to wash the files.... (4.00 / 1)
...of Wellpoint signatures, apparently.

This is all that needs saying as to why the Baucus plan is a non-starter:

According to the New York Times, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America will spend $150 million specifically boosting for the health care reform proposal introduced last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT).
Now the mark-up and let us watch and witness as the Gang Dems vote against the Democratic amendments.

Would the public option really lead (0.00 / 0)
to single-payer in the long run (next 10-20 years)? I don't see how insurance company lobbying could ever let this happen, no matter how many politicians claim to support it. Just seems impossible given the math. Well, at least things are moving forward. I think there will be a vote.  

It will if we start electing Single Payer Dems. (4.00 / 2)
I am starting to like the phrase, like New Deal Dems for FDR. But we also need Green dems, and anti war dems, so whatever become the frame for 2010, and lets start now, lets get em elected.

NOW is the time to start working for more better dems. Nominate the Single Payer Dems anywhere, anytime.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
define robust public option (0.00 / 0)
No matter what happens in the Finance committee, it is essential that there is a vote on health care reform with a robust public option on the floor of the Senate.

Do you consider the public option in the senate HELP bill robust? What about HB 3200? If not, which amendment, currently proposed, constitute a robust pubic option?

So far as I know the only public options are limited to the poorest of the poor and in the case of HB 3200, don't kick in until 2013.

So where is this robust public option I keep hearing about?


"change Susan Collins and PhRMA can believe in" (0.00 / 0)
Chris, that's a cheap shot worthy of Sirota.  Are you telling us this Baucus piece of shit is THE bill?  Come on.  

I think everyone can agree (0.00 / 0)
that the bill behind which the insurance industry throws its funds is THE BILL. I think, and I am politically young, that the best option is to get on-the-line senators to vote for cloture and then vote against a public option if they think its really that politically necessary to get re-elected.

I have almost given up on the idea that the public option will really do much to reform the health system. More like fill in some of the gaps and serve as a political win for O. I would love to buy into it but I'm sure I'll be ineligible.

I predict that the Progressive block compromises to a trigger or very weak PO. Then the senate lowers it to co-ops.

Obama's Record
Climate Change: Win
Healthcare: Win
Financial Reform: On the way. More to come at the G20

Empirical benfits: zero

Agitate.Liberate.Create.


I take that back... (4.00 / 1)
that was too cynical. There won't be zero benefits. But the benefits will be far outweighed by the eventual flaws--since they are systemic. Cap and trade will be an epic fail and it will encounter the same complex as the stimulus. The average american is told its uber liberal while real lefties are pushing for something entirely more substantial.

While Obama may be effecting meaningful reform in a sense, he is positioning himself to discredit leftism in the long run.
But maybe his intention was never to defend liberalism, use to use it for political positioning. It al seems entirely unsustainable to me.

Again, all predictions from a young mind...

Agitate.Liberate.Create.


The young mind is also unfamiliar with the reality of politics... (0.00 / 0)
Obama is just one man, and he has to deal with a sea of egos and lords in the congress, many who value their personal worth and power way more than the country...  Most of our caucus are good people that work hard towards our values... The problem is, the political system allows a handful of ne'er-do-wells  to have enormous control over the outcome.  

The system is designed against change.  If it wasn't, we would have had single payer right now, like in every democracy with a parliamentary system.

The problem is systemic, with a political system that is rigged against change.

We should probably be happy that any change is coming at all... after all, not even FDR could get health care reform passed... and, yet, it seems very disappointing, doesn't it?

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
Mixed truths (4.00 / 2)
While I agree with everything you say here, I think there are other shades of gray in all this.  Even if you are 100% pure going in, there are real reasons to compromise, scratch the backs of others to get what you really care about, etc.  But even if the reason is real and reasonable, each time you do it you become just a bit more tainted.

The same goes for raising money, which politicians hate.  But every fund raising event removes just a bit of purity.

A lot of people like to think of bad politicians as bought and paid for, because it explains everything nicely, with their own favorites as pure.  But it is all a mixed bag.


[ Parent ]
I am quite familiar with the reality of politics. (0.00 / 0)
everything you just said--I am in full agreement with. Please explain how my post is contrary to that aim. I am full aware of Obama's situation in the political establishment. I was lamenting. (a complex of the progressive left)

Despite my relative newbieness to the blogosphere, I am informed of the historical tendencies of political elite. What I am concerned with is how to bridge that disconnect to effect real change.

That may be euphemistic but its all I've got. There is politics and there is policy. Neither have grounding in reality...

Agitate.Liberate.Create.


We don't need the bill to come out of the Finance committee... (0.00 / 0)
We'd be far better off getting Democrats on the committee to prevent the bill coming out of the committee itself -- leaving the Senate HELP committee version of the bill the only one on the table.

In other words, the "public option" advocates in the finance committee should vote "no" on whatever Baucus is offering -- that way, the HELP bill becomes the sole available framework for a Senate vote.


No, we do need a bill from the Finance Committee (0.00 / 0)
the only way we can bypass it is to put a House bill on the floor of the Senate for consideration.

Senate rules, we cannot put the HELP bill on the floor until it is merged with a bill from the Finance Committee because the HELP bill relies on taxes and Medicare cuts, which fall under Finance jurisdiction.  


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox