Senate Democrats in the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) finally squelched Republican boycotts and passed a version of the climate bill yesterday morning. Last week, Republican Senators refused to show up to committee hearings in an attempt to stall the bill. Brian Beutler of Talking Points Memo notes that EPW has now set "the stage for other panels to amend the legislation."
This week the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held three hearings on the Kerry-Boxer clean energy bill and, as David Roberts reports for Grist, Republican Senators had an "adolescent tantrum" about the cost of emission reductions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Energy Information Administration (EIA) and other organizations have extensively debunked this line of debate.
Yesterday, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee passed the Baucus health care bill.
What a disappointment. No public health insurance plan. No universal coverage. No real price controls. Billions of taxpayer dollars for insurance companies.
The U.S. health system has left 46 million Americans uninsured. [1] 45,000 people die every year due to lack of insurance. [2] Insurance companies deny coverage to thousands more when they actually get sick. And insurance is simply too expensive for millions of people and businesses.
The Baucus bill solves none of those problems.
By contrast, Medicare is so efficient that it could insure all Americans for the same amount of money that we now give to private corporations.3
Under such a single-payer system, you still get to choose your doctor... except without a profiteering insurance corporation standing between you and your health care.
Will you ask Congress to support real reform -- in terms they can understand?
(1) "Income, poverty and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2008." Census Bureau, September 10, 2009.
(2) "Harvard study finds nearly 45,000 excess deaths annually linked to lack of health coverage." Physicians for a National Health Program, September 18, 2009.
(3) "Single payer system cost?" Physicians for a National Health Program.
Yesterday, the Senate Finance Committee finally passed its health care bill. John Nichols of the Nationreacts:
If every kid in class finishes their homework except for one, guess which kid will get the most attention. That's right, the slacker.
And, when the slacker finally does turn in the assignment, it is invariably a slapdash job that fails to meet minimum standards.
So it is in the U.S. Senate, where the Finance Committee finally got around to finishing its health care reform assignment.
The bill passed by a vote of 14-9. All the Democrats, plus Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) voted in favor. As we know, it doesn't include a public option.
Robert Scheer, also of the Nation, sums up the bill as written:
The main thrust of the proposal is to forcibly submit even more customers to the tender mercies of the insurance industry while doing nothing significant to cut costs. Insurers will now pretend that the burdens on them are onerous and will demand concessions to make this an even bigger boondoggle for the medical profiteers than George W. Bush's prescription drug coverage initiative.
Sheer sees the Finance Committee bill as a sop to the health insurers. If it were to pass in its present form, it would deliver millions of new customers to private insurers by requiring everyone to carry insurance. The free market keeps costs down when companies compete to give the best value for the lowest price. But most health insurers operate as monopolies on their home turf. If insurers had to compete for customers, they'd have an incentive to lower their prices. That's why progressives want to introduce competition in the form of a public option.
An all-private insurance system gives power to an industry that it is indifferent to the needs of the people it claims to serve.
Before we go any further, our warmest congratulations to Robin Marty, who is expecting her second child. In a piece for RH Reality check, Marty details how the private insurance industry toys with people's lives in pursuit of profit. For Marty and her husband, joy is mixed with apprehension because their maximum out-of-pocket insurance cost just doubled. By the time the baby arrives, Marty's husband expects to pay 10% of his pre-tax income just to keep his family insured. And they'd better hope that bundle of joy is of an actuarially-approved size. An insurance company in Colorado refused to cover a 4-month-old baby because he was "too fat," according to the boy's father. The company relented after media pressure, but there's no indication that they plan to drop their general rule that babies whose weight is above the 95th percentile don't get covered.
Earlier this week, the insurance industry broadsided the Obama administration by releasing a "report" warning that health care reform would cause premiums to skyrocket.
As economist Robert Reich explains in TAPPED, the industry was upset that the Senate Finance Committee was considering more lenient punishments for young healthy people who don't buy health insurance. (They would still be fined, just not as much.) The industry report claimed that if the government spares the rod, only old sick people will sign up, and premiums will be higher for everyone. Reich argues that the report inadvertently makes the case for the public option:
But the bomb went off under the insurers. The only reason these costs can be passed on to consumers in the form of higher premiums is because there's not enough competition among private insurers to force them to absorb the costs by becoming more efficient. Get it? Health insurers have just made the best argument yet about why a public insurance option is necessary.
Steve Benen of the Washington Independent notes that former Democrat Joe Lieberman (I-Conn) went on Don Imus's syndicated shock jock radio show to echo the insurance industry's talking points. "I'm afraid that in the end, the Baucus bill is actually going to raise the price of insurance for most of the people in the country," Lieberman said.
With all this hypothesizing and posturing, it's easy to forget that neither Lieberman-nor anyone else-is going to vote on the Baucus bill as written. The Finance Committee bill is just one of several proposals to have passed their respective committees. In the Senate, the more liberal Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) passed a bill with a public option this summer. All the House health reform bills also include a public option.
As Mike Lillis of the Washington Independent explains, the tone of the debate is expected to shift dramatically: Now that the various bills have cleared their bipartisan committees, power shifts to the Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate who are in charge of shaping the final legislation.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the economy by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Pulse for a complete list of articles on economic issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
To start with, PhARMA, the big pharmaceuticals lobby, is spending 12 million bucks right now on ads promoting the Baucus bill, and they've set aside a total of 150 million bucks for the rest of the campaign. This is part of the 80 billion that the industry has pledged over ten years to reduce pharmaceutical costs ( although how this 12 million reduces costs, I don't know... surely they will find a way to bill this expense to the consumer.)
Just when you thought the Baucus revolving door couldn't spin faster: LittleSis has found that the Senate staffer responsible for devising the tax policies at the heart of the Baucus plan is a former lobbyist for health insurance and pharmaceutical interests, including an insurance industry front group.
Cathy Koch, who heads the Senate Finance committee's tax department, was director of global government affairs at pharmaceutical company Amgen until early 2007. Before that, she worked at Ernst and Young, where she lobbied on behalf of a number of large insurance and pharmaceutical companies, including Aetna, Blue Cross, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer.
Tax incentives and calculations are central to health care reform plan that Baucus sent to members of the Gang of Six this weekend, including a penalty on health insurance companies offering expensive plans. The "Cadillac" plan tax has received significant media attention as a particularly important and controversial feature that targets insurance companies.
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America are running a 10-day vote where progressives can decide which states to bring the WeWantThePublicOption.com "sign your name" ad to.
Ads will feature the names of local residents from across a given state and call out the local Senate Dem for taking millions from health and insurance interests while threatening to oppose the public option. (A slight variation of the ad to the right we've been running in DC the last few weeks.)
Thousands of people have voted. So far, Baucus is in first place, Kerry second, Feinstein third, Lieberman fourth, Bayh fifth, and so on.
STATE BLOGS
