Even though the Senate health care bill merger process is getting more press, the House is undergoing the same process for its three health care bills.
The two main disputes in the House merger process:
The first is over Democrat Bart Stupak's attempt to prevent any health insurance plans from covering abortions. If he were successful, health care reform would lose so many pro-choice votes that the entire bill will die. Fortunately, Stupak's plan seems likely to fail.
The second debate is over whether to include a public option tied to Medicare +5% rates, or one with negotiated rates. Three weeks ago, the Congressional Progressive Caucus was challenged by Speaker Pelosi to demonstrate enough support to pass the Medicare +5% public option. Since, then, the CPC has been engaged in a whip count to do just that.
The second argument is the main event in the House merger process at this point. The general thinking is that if the House passes the Medicare +5% public option, then the conference report is much more likely to emerge with a triggerless public option of some sort (negotiated rates, Schumer's level playing field, or perhaps the opt-out).
A whip count being undertaken by the Congressional Progressive Caucus indicates that support for the liberal public option among House Democrats is just shy of the needed 218. There are "about 200" solid supporters, 15 leaning yes, 20 undecided and 30 "no" votes, according to a Progressive Caucus source. Of the 30 "no" votes, 23 are likely "no" votes on the overall bill, the source said.
With Robert Wexler's retirement, there are currently 255 members of the House Democratic caucus. The numbers above suggest the following breakdown of House support for the Medicare +5% public option:
Deducing the state of the House Medicare +5% whip count:
The numbers listed in The Hill only add up to 250, even though they were taken at a time when there were 256 members of the Democratic caucus. So, six members were not whipped.
I was told earlier that the leadership was not included in the whip count (the leadership whips itself, and hardly ever voted against the majority of the caucus). The very top Democratic leadership means six members--Speak Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, Whip Clyburn, DCCC chair Van Hollen, Caucus Chair Larson, and Caucus Vice-Chair Becerra. They are the gap of six in the whip count.
The CPC is clearly including the "lean yes" supporters in the 200 overall supporters they are claiming. This is because:
256 House Democrats
Minus the six top leaders makes 250
Minus the 30 no and "lean no" makes 220
Minus the 20 undecided makes 200
So, there are 185 House Democrats solidly behind the Medicare +5% public option, 15 leaning toward the Medicare +5% public option, and six House leaders who can be counted on to support health care reform with a Medicare +5% public option if it goes to the floor.
That makes 206. Minus Robert Wexler, and it drops to 205. Add the winner of the CA-10 special election on November 3rd, and it goes back up to 206. The remaining 12 votes will have to be culled from the 20 undecided Representatives, and the 7 "lean no" Representatives. Speaker Pelosi made an overture to that group yesterday, floating a Medicare +5% public option with $20 billion for rural hospitals:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi is seeking to modify the House healthcare legislation to bring centrists around to the more liberal government-run insurance option, hoping that will give her the strongest negotiating position with the Senate.
In a closed-door session with a diverse group of Democrats on Wednesday, Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered a $20 billion tweak in hospital reimbursement rates to rural lawmakers.
It is a positive sign that the leadership is trying to bring the Medicare +5% public option home. The CPC's whip count must have convinced her it was worth an effort, which is an improvement from last week:
In a meeting today between House leaders and rank and file Dems in the capital, Nancy Pelosi frustrated many liberals by suggesting that they consider a watered-down public option as a way of getting health care through the House, a top House liberal says.(...)
In an interview with me, Dem Rep. Raul Grijalva described the scene in frustrated tones. He said House leaders acknowledged the popularity within the Dem caucus of the robust public option, but asked them to consider a public option where reimbursment rates are negotiated individually with providers. That's a solution Blue Dogs favor but liberals reject.
"Unfortunately, the discussion was about negotiated rates," Grijalva told me. "We continue to be very much opposed to that."
On October 7th, Speaker Pelosi was floating the negotiated rates public option to the Progressive Caucus. One week later, she was floating a tweaked version of the Medicare +5% public option to the entire Democratic Caucus. This shows the public option campaign is gaining ground in the House, and close to a real breakthrough.
