It is as I predicted.
I have been very opposed to the idea of bipartisanship it it means gutting the principle goals of the larger policy. To get a few Republicans to vote ‘yes’, and remove the core values that placed the Democrats in power is not leadership. It is gutless politics. With that said…..
After weeks of secretive talks, a bipartisan group in the Senate edged closer Monday to a health care compromise that omits a requirement for businesses to offer coverage to their workers and lacks a government insurance option that President Barack Obama favors, according to numerous officials.
Like bills drafted by Democrats, the proposal under discussion by six members on the Senate Finance Committee would bar insurance companies from denying coverage to any applicant. Nor could insurers charge higher premiums on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.
But it jettisons other core Democratic provisions in a reach for bipartisanship on an issue that has so far produced little.
The effort received a boost during the day from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, normally a close ally of Republicans. In a letter to committee leaders, the business group called for the panel to “act promptly, preferably before” the Senate’s scheduled vacation at the end of next week. In doing so, the business organization dealt a blow to the Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other GOP lawmakers who have called repeatedly for Democrats to slow down.
In yet another boost for the drive to enact legislation, PhRMA, which represents drug companies, has purchased more than $500,000 worth of television ads to air during the week in nine states.
Obama’s top domestic priority has suffered numerous setbacks in recent weeks, and Republicans have stepped up their criticism. A Senate vote has been postponed until September. Administration and Democratic leadershope to show significant progress before lawmakers begin their monthlong recess in hopes of regaining momentum.
In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, “We’re on schedule to do it now or do it whenever,” when asked whether the House would complete its bill before lawmakers leave at the end of the week. Democrats called a meeting of all their House members late Monday afternoon.
In the Senate, officials stressed that no agreement has been reached on a bipartisan measure, and said there is no guarantee of one. They also warned that numerous key issues remain to be settled, including several options to pay for the legislation. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss matters under private negotiations.
They said any legislation that emerges from the talks is expected to provide for a non-profit cooperative to sell insurance in competition with private industry, rather than giving the federal government a role in the marketplace. The White House and numerous Democrats in Congress have called for a government option to provide competition to private companies and hold down costs.
Officials also said a bipartisan compromise would not subject companies to a penalty if they declined to offer coverage to their workers. These businesses would be required to reimburse the government for part or all of any federal subsidies designed to help lower-income employees obtain insurance on their own.
Democratic-drafted legislation in the House includes both a penalty and a requirement for companies to share in the cost of covering employees.
Any measure along the lines under discussion could face difficulties on the Senate floor, where Democrats command a 60-vote majority.
Additionally, negotiators are likely to call for a commission to recommend long-term savings in Medicare that would take effect automatically unless overturned by Congress. Unlike some of the other provisions, that is an issue that unites the White House and business groups seeking to rein in the cost of medical care.
Among tax increases likely to be adopted is an excise tax of as much as 35 percent on insurance with very high annual premiums, perhaps over $25,000.
The senators involved in the negotiations are all members of the Senate Finance Committee, and include Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman, and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the senior Republican. Others participating are Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, and Republicans Olympia Snowe of Maine and Mike Enzi of Wyoming.
They have met for hours in recent weeks in Baucus’ office, joined by aides and outside advisers such as actuaries summoned to explain arcane details of insurance. Douglas Elmendorf, head of the Congressional Budget Office, has also attended.
Baucus has been under intense pressure from the White House and Senate Democrats in recent weeks to convene the committee to vote out legislation to advance Obama’s goal of extending health care to millions who lack it while curbing the explosive growth of health care costs overall. He has so far declined to do so, opting to give the bipartisan negotiations as much time as needed to succeed.
Several Democratic officials have said he recently pledged to Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that the committee would meet next week to vote on legislation, a timetable that implies time is growing short for the bipartisan group to wrap up its work.
Much of the cost of the proposal would come from curbing the growth in fees to insurance companies and other providers under Medicare.
But congressional aides in both parties as well as lobbyists said a proposal limiting Flexible Savings Accounts to $2,000 annually is also a strong possibility. FSAs permit the use of pre-tax income to pay for items such as health care and child care.
Negotiators also are considering fees on the manufacturers of medical devices and on the makers of both brand name and generic drugs coming onto the market.
To cut down on the cost of the bill, the bipartisan group may include only one year of a long-term plan to adjust reimbursement fees under Medicare.
Officials said the legislation under discussion in a series of private meetings would likely cost under $1 trillion, include an expansion of Medicaid, and provide federal subsidies for individuals and families up to 300 percent of poverty to spread health care more broadly.
Individuals would have a mandate to buy affordable insurance, but companies would not have a requirement to offer it.
It was not clear whether companies would be required to reimburse Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor, for the cost of covering any employees enrolled.
Nor was it clear what, if any, provision the proposal would include to make sure companies did not simply withdraw insurance as a fringe benefit to millions of workers who now have it.