"Senate panel rejects gov't-run insurance option"
C.Tudor
Let me know if you see anything in this article that I haven't been
predicting all year. We're getting the health care "re-form" that's
been bought and paid for by the Insurance Industry.
Email your elected officials and ask them how much money they've
accepted from the Insurance Industry during the last five years:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
-------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090929/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul
Senate panel rejects gov't-run insurance option
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent David Espo, Ap Special
Correspondent
33 mins ago
WASHINGTON � In a long-anticipated showdown, liberal Democrats twice
failed on Tuesday to inject a government-run insurance option into
sweeping health care legislation taking shape in the Senate, despite
bipartisan agreement that private insurers must change their ways.
The two votes marked a victory for Montana Democrat Max Baucus, the
Senate Finance Committee chairman, who is hoping to push his
middle-of-the-road measure through the panel by week's end. It also kept
alive the possibility that at least one Republican may yet swing behind
the overhaul, a key goal of both Baucus and the White House.
The developments occurred as Democrats in the House sought savings to
reduce their companion legislation to roughly $900 billion over a
decade, the price tag President Barack Obama has suggested.
One option under consideration would reduce the number of individuals
and families eligible for federal health coverage subsidies to those
earning less than 400 percent of poverty, or about $43,000 for a single
person and $88,000 for a family of four, officials said, commenting only
on condition of anonymity. The subsidies are designed to make insurance
more affordable, and account for a significant percentage of spending in
the bill.
Without disclosing any of the details of a marathon closed-door
leadership meeting, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters,
"It's hard work, but we're determined to get it (the bill's cost) down."
If anything, the health care debate was growing more intense. According
to one independent organization, television advertising around the issue
has been running at a level of more than $1.1 million a day for the past
week and now stands over $100 million since the beginning of the year.
Inside the Senate Finance Committee, Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said his
proposal to allow the government to sell insurance in competition with
private industry was far from the federal takeover that critics portray.
"It's not. It's optional," he said, adding it was designed to offer
competition and a lower-priced, reliable choice for consumers shopping
for coverage.
"Washington is not the answer," countered Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.
The key votes were cast by Baucus and four other Democrats, who sided
with Republicans who were united against the proposed change in the
bill. "The public option would help to hold insurance companies' feet to
the fire, I don't think there's much doubt about that, but my first job
is to get this bill across the finish line," said the chairman.
"No one shows me how to get to 60 votes with a public option," he said,
employing the term used to describe a new government role in health
care. It would take 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to overcome any
filibuster Republicans might attempt.
Supporters of a new role for government repeatedly accused private
insurers of placing profits over coverage, and said they would try for a
federal option again when the full Senate votes.
"With some work and some compromise, we can get the 60 votes on the
floor of the Senate that will make our system better by providing for a
strong, fair and viable public option," said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New
York, who sponsored the second proposal to inject more competition into
the insurance market.
For the Finance Committee, the day marked the beginning of a second week
of public debate over sweeping legislation that generally adheres to
conditions that Obama has called for.
The bill includes numerous new consumer protections, including a ban on
companies denying insurance on the basis of pre-existing conditions. At
the same time it provides government subsidies to help lower-income
Americans afford insurance that is currently beyond their means. It also
includes steps that supporters say will begin to slow the growth in
health care costs nationwide.
After weeks of delay, both the House and Senate now appear on track to
vote on different versions of health care legislation this fall. Passage
in both houses would set the stage for a compromise to be voted on by
year's end.
Rockefeller, whose measure was rejected, 15-8, assailed the insurance
industry in withering terms. "I hate to use the word 'rapacious,'" he
said � but quickly added it was warranted. He said omission of a
government option from the measure was a virtual invitation to insurance
companies to continue placing profits over people, and he predicted they
would raise their premiums substantially once the legislation went into
effect.
Republicans countered that the proposals would lead to the demise of the
private insurance industry and result in a system that is completely run
by the government.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, cited private studies � one by the
conservative Heritage Foundation, the other by the Lewin Group, owned by
United HealthCare � saying millions would be pushed out of private
insurance as the government held fees to doctors at artificially low
levels. He said the result would be a violation of Obama's pledge that
consumers would be able to keep their current insurance if they wanted
once the legislation went into effect.
While Baucus voted against the proposal, he was at pains to counter
Rockefeller's charge that the legislation increased subsidies that would
go to insurance companies without dictating changes in past practices.
He said the legislation would raise taxes on insurers, ban denial of
coverage because of pre-existing conditions and limit the extra premiums
that could be charged on the basis of age.
There was little appetite on the panel for a full-throated defense of
the insurance industry, even among Republicans who voted against an
expanded government role.
"The private sector is not doing exactly what it should do with medical
services. but it can,' said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., one of the
committee's most conservative members. He said most Democrats "don't
want to help the insurance company" improve, preferring to have the
government step in.
Schumer responded promptly.
"If the state insurance commissioners are doing such a good job, then
why are costs going through the roof?" he asked.
All 10 Republicans on the committee voted against the Rockefeller
proposal to allow the government to compete directly with insurance
companies, Sen. Olympia Snowe among them. Democrats are hoping the Maine
lawmaker will eventually break ranks with her party and support the
legislation.
Also opposed were Baucus and fellow Democrats Kent Conrad of North
Dakota, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Bill Nelson of Florida and Tom
Carper of Delaware.
Schumer backed an alternative approach that he said would introduce more
competition into the insurance market nationwide. His version differed
from Rockefeller's chiefly in that it would have allowed for the
government to negotiate payments with doctors, hospitals and other
health care providers for an initial two-year period rather than pay
them at the same rates as under Medicare.
Baucus, Conrad and Lincoln joined all Republicans to defeat the proposal
on a vote of 13-10.
According to Evan Tracey, who heads a private data tracking company
called the Campaign Media Analysis Group, about $47 million has been
spent for ads favoring a health overhaul and $32 million has gone to
opposing the effort. The rest has been spent on commercials that
generally mention the issues.
____
Associated Press writer Erica Werner in Washington contributed to this
story.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090929/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul