TPMDC
Next Step for Senate Liberals: Get the Ball Out of Baucus' Court
Share
Send to a friend!
Liberals aren't particularly impressed with the draft health care legislation Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) circulated over the weekend...to say the least. But for reform-oriented members of the Senate the key at this point is simple: get the ball out of Baucus' court.
Though they were largely closed out of negotiations over health care legislation for the last several weeks, some members of the Senate Finance Committee--including Sens. Schumer, Rockefeller, and Kerry--do support a public option. But though Baucus' draft falls far short on that score, they'll almost certainly vote to move it forward anyhow.
"If they vote against it, it won't be in the Finance committee," says a Senate Democratic aide.
Once it's out of committee, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will take the lead in merging it with legislation voted out of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee--and at that point, the fate of the public option in the Senate will be largely in his hands.
Many observers expect that he'll affix a public option to a trigger, which will be pulled years down the line if insurance companies don't lower prices and expand access on their own.
Today, Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will meet with President Barack Obama to game legislative strategy ahead of Obama's speech before a joint session of Congress tomorrow. (Obama will also meet with progressive House leaders to hear their concerns and apprise them of the status of negotiations over the public option.)
For weeks now, it's been clear that a bill without a public option will be a hard sell in the House, but a bill with a public option will be a hard sell in the Senate. By the end of the day, we should have a clearer idea who's going to win that tug of war.
Comments (16) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
FreeRider
September 8, 2009 9:27 AM
Baucus got time in the national spotligght and demonstrated how completely inept he is as a legislator. It's like he was starring in a movie called "How to Humiliate Yourself and Alienate Your Colleagues."
I bet his fellow senators are shaking their heads and laughing at the sorry bastard.
This piece was written 8 years ago but is just as relevant and true today as ever.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33420
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Xantar
September 8, 2009 9:48 AM in reply to FreeRider
Wow, that was really written 8 years ago? What was Baucus doing in 2001 that got on The Onion's bad side?
And once again, I have to ask the cliched question of our times: why are we getting more honest news from The Onion than we are from the MSM?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
September 8, 2009 10:03 AM in reply to Xantar
I think the Onion just saw how pathetic Baucus is. The rest of us had no idea until he made hash out of healthcare negotiations.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jimbomoron
September 8, 2009 10:08 AM
Brian, I think you're mistaking the forest for the trees on the Baucus plan. The biggest problem isn't the public option -- it's the community rating, the minimum benefits package, the subsidies, and the employer mandate. There's no way the American people would support a policy that forces a family of four earning $80,000/yr. to pay 13 percent of their income in premiums alone for a policy that has a $1,500-$2,000 deductible and $10,000 out-of-pocket cap. Not if it's the public plan or a private plan. But that's what the Baucus proposal, which has the 13 percent premium cap at 300-400 percent FPL and a minimum benefits package of 65 percent actuarial value, does. At the end of the day, the House bill with the Finance Committee's co-ops is still preferable to the Senate Finance Committee bill with the House's public option for the reasons I just outlined.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dcdanny
September 8, 2009 11:32 AM in reply to jimbomoron
Right on!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lolis
September 8, 2009 10:28 AM
What is your evidence the House is having trouble rounding up votes for a public plan? You do realize the public plan in the House has more than enough votes to pass? For all the talk of the teabaggers, nothing has really changed. This seems like bad reporting on your part.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
September 8, 2009 10:48 AM in reply to Lolis
Methink you mis-read the last 'graph:
Seems correct to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
virginiacynic
September 8, 2009 11:15 AM
trigger?
without a public option now this will be an almost unbelievable duping of gullible progressives (such as I was) by Obama.
I really thought that Hilary was the one who would pull some stunt like this.
But at least I will no longer give any money ( I know, I'll need it for the increase in my 1400 @ month family premium) or work for the national democrats if they blow this one as they seem poised to do.
And with roll call talking about house liberals willing to vote for the trigger I think that I will throw up.
Please spare me the lesser of evils talk and the half a loaf arguments. I'm getting to old for it. These people are not progressives , they arej just liberal corporate-statists
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
September 8, 2009 11:17 AM
Get the ball out of Reid's court too!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
capeJoe
September 8, 2009 11:18 AM
Oh my, how far we've come from a President who campaigned promising publicly funded healthcare available to all to agreeing to public option triggers. Worse than worthless, it gives the insurance companies more time to organize and spread bribes and lies against single-payer healthcare and when the Republicans take over power in the Congress, they'll just repeal the trigger. If Congress did nothing it would be at least honest that they have no intention to reform healthcare payment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
September 8, 2009 12:49 PM in reply to capeJoe
Congress has been doing nothing for years, and there is nothing honest about it!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
capeJoe
September 8, 2009 4:23 PM in reply to GTFOOH
Well, I do think they have been successful in sending taxpayer money to failing banks, financial houses, dying corporations and the defense industry. They did that quite quickly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Derek Stodghill
September 8, 2009 11:31 AM
Nate Silver has an interesting post about triggers in the public option. Basically, which would you prefer? A triggered public option that took effect if (or when) premiums reached a certain cost increase based on inflation and would then have premiums based around Medicare costs. Or a public option now that has prices negotiated at prevailing private-industry rates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jinx
September 8, 2009 11:41 AM
Obama never promised publicly funded health care available to all. The problem with all of the plans even with a public option as currently structured is costs of the premiums and the deductibles for those not eligible for subsidies which is a large percentage of the middle class families. It would be preferable to have caps on premium costs, deductibles and co-pays along with mandated basic coverage if you are going to force people to purchase insurance. These plans focus on universality of coverage but, at least from what I have see, little on affordability. The current public option will do little to address that issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PeachesNYC
September 8, 2009 12:27 PM
Why didn't they do this earlier? Why didn't they just humor Baucus and the other Blew Dogs and say, "yes, yes, that sounds good" and just get the bill out of committee? They're just going to change it during reconciliation, aren't they? Am I missing something?
BTW, Baucus and his shut out of Dems is a slimy GOP maneuver. And it's exactly the sort of thing Reid should be doing to get a GOOD bill passed. Shut out GOPers and strong arm the Dem stonewallers. Doesn't anyone in the leadership remember the Johnson treatment?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
USgreentech
September 8, 2009 1:14 PM
The guy needs to go or step up with the public option.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?