
Two of the House's most influential chairmen say that health care negotiations between the House, Senate, and President Obama have come so far, that they'll be ready to send a package to Congressional scorekeepers this weekend.
Congress Daily caught up with Rep. George Miller (D-CA)--chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee--and Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY)--chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee--who both acknowledged that a compromise could be just around the corner.
"We hope to be able to send in the next couple days our changes to CBO," Miller said (sub. req.).
Rangel said they'd have a package ready for scoring by Saturday.
Congressional negotiators and the White House have made significant headway on resolving two of the biggest differences between the House and Senate health care bills in recent days, and it looks like they're just about ready to wrap things up.
Steaming Pile
January 14, 2010 9:56 AM
Wonderful news! Now let's keep the Kennedy Senate seat blue, for God's sake!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris
January 14, 2010 10:35 AM in reply to Steaming Pile
That would be nice, but I'm just glad we are finally getting a socialist takeover of health care.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
January 14, 2010 10:41 AM in reply to Chris
LOL. Now if we could just nationalize the other commanding heights of the economy and return the top marginal rate to 90%, we'd be all set.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
January 14, 2010 11:15 AM in reply to Steaming Pile
You mean the people's seat, don't you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
January 14, 2010 11:30 AM in reply to Silence
It's the damndest thing. We're supposed to be the evil soshulists, but you guys are the ones who keep talking like commies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RTM
January 14, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to Steaming Pile
If it's soooo great ...
Why aren't the congressmen ans senators going to be part of the plan themselves ?
It's good enough for everyone else that are the peons but not for them ?
Wow maybe they know it's not sooo great, maybe right down horrible or they would adamantly want to be participants
themselves !
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 14, 2010 9:59 AM
Yes, but would there be time to pass it if Brown wins in Mass? Doesn't sound like it...
Also, I'm just waiting for Lieberschmuck to stab them in the back again and say he can't support it.
Don't mean to be such a downer -- this probably is really good news.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
January 14, 2010 10:14 AM in reply to Moose49
Yes I have the same sinking feeling(s) as you do Moose. But let's hope that Coakley wins in MA. And IMHO: the quicker the Dems move on HCR, the better the chances of it passing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frex
January 14, 2010 11:36 AM in reply to Moose49
Frankly if Brown wins Tuesday, then the House should simply pass the existing Senate bill and be done with it. The massive sh-t storm and PR disaster that would result if it appeared that Senate Dems were holding up seating Brown would not be worth the minor improvements that the negotiations may produce.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 14, 2010 11:49 AM in reply to Frex
Perhaps, but boy that would be hard to swallow.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
January 14, 2010 10:17 AM
Increase affordability, national exchange, cadillac tax focused on lowering costs and not hitting middle class families. It's a damn good start.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 14, 2010 10:21 AM
Obama indicated some willingness to listen to people about the funding mechanism and taxing the "Cadillac" plans. The folks defending these plans from the Administration made a good case that there's a definite disconnect between a plan's price-tag and its deliverables. Hopefully that will go somewhere.
Regarding a Federal versus a "States' Rights" system of exchanges, don't hold your breath waiting for Federal oversight. There's no way Majority Leader Lieberman will let the Senate go that way.
It will be interesting to see if the House has managed to move implementation up any. Most of the "leadership" still doesn't get it about pissing on the base, vis-a-vis the 2010 elections. Those who do get it don't seem to have any pull.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
January 14, 2010 10:31 AM in reply to EastWest
You make some damn good points, especially about implimentation, I am leaning towards them shafting us and starting in 2014. It's not good policy or politics. The only plus is the optics, which makes the bill look cheaper than it is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
January 14, 2010 10:35 AM
Can it be voted on before the MA election?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 14, 2010 10:38 AM
I love that the prime Congressional corruption expert is the featured picture. It speaks volumes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
January 14, 2010 10:53 AM in reply to shooter242
Love the sinner, hate the sin! :)
It's how I learned to love Tommy Delay, son (he of the "twist arms and extort in the middle of the night to pass the Medicare drug benefit").
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 14, 2010 11:01 AM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Let's see, Rangel writes tax law and then ignores it for personal profit. I'm pretty sure Delay didn't.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dswx
January 14, 2010 11:18 AM in reply to shooter242
The fact that you consider any tax law violation more important or significant than literally saving American lives via HCR speaks incredibly loud about your complete lack of basic human morals. I do feel sad for your family though. No family should have to have such ignorance and hate in their own family.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 14, 2010 11:46 AM in reply to dswx
Oh please. I said nothing about HCR, just about the person organizing it. Are you condoning corruption? Sure sounds like it. That "speaks incredibly loud about your complete lack of basic human morals."
Tsk.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
January 14, 2010 12:02 PM in reply to shooter242
I love that the prime Congressional corruption expert during W's administration is nowhere to be chastised in any of shooter242's previous postings to TPM. It speaks volumes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
January 14, 2010 11:53 AM in reply to shooter242
No, Delay was charged with another crime in Texas court--but thanks for exposing your own shifting political morality. Next.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 14, 2010 12:04 PM in reply to human
Rangel on the other hand hasn't been charged, hounded out of office, or lacked for defenders. As always IOKIYAD. Tsk. Tsk.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
January 14, 2010 12:13 PM in reply to shooter242
Statement of the Acting Chairman and Ranking Republican Member establishing an investigative subcommittee to conduct an inquiry regarding Representative Charles B. Rangel
http://ethics.house.gov/Media/PDF/Press_Statement_Rangel_2008.pdf
Surely you believe that every American is innocent until proven guilty, right shooter242?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 14, 2010 1:10 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Including Mr. Delay?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
January 14, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to shooter242
Yes, including Mr. Saturday Night Fever. Answer the question, please?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
January 14, 2010 12:17 PM in reply to shooter242
Let's see, Rangel writes tax law and then ignores it for personal profit. I'm pretty sure Delay didn't
Naw, he just ignored it for Jack Abramoff's personal benefit. The Hammer was a generous guy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
January 14, 2010 10:42 AM
Nothing is imminent unless Nelson and Lieberscum are part of the Senate negotiating team and neither are. Expect one or the other to decide to filibuster. If they do I hope Reid puts it on the floor. Dems would have 59 votes and could say this is the bill and the GOP is holding up the jobs bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
davcbr
January 14, 2010 10:44 AM in reply to Walter Mitty
Perhaps Leiberman, but I think even Nelson would have a pretty difficult time if he voted against with the package he wrangled out of us.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
January 14, 2010 12:19 PM in reply to davcbr
Nelson may be conservative, but my impression is that he's a straight shooter -- or at least, the kind of politician who stays bought.
The Lieberslime is the guy to worry about.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
davcbr
January 14, 2010 10:42 AM
Part of the compromise: "collectively bargained benefit plans could be exempted from the tax"
Now why does the language have to be THAT? Why such a direct play to the unions? Could the wording be just as effective by making a statement like "those workers over the 'X' percentile in wages [ you know, so it doesn't need adjusting every year like the AMT] would pay the tax. Then, union workers would benefit for the most part, and non-union workers in the same wage circumstance would also be exempt.
Somebody tell me what is wrong with doing it that way?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 14, 2010 11:14 AM in reply to davcbr
If that's true, it will give the tea-baggers something more to shriek about. Anything that so explicitly favors unions will have them peeing themselves. Normally that would be good, IMO, but this is an election year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Will Kenworthy
January 14, 2010 11:02 AM
If they have a deal, they know well enough to make sure they have the votes for it.
There's so much more we could have done, but this will do for now. Come back for more in 2011 if the majority hangs on.
Remember why we're doing this thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNT5zKusqlQ ("Chemotherapy by Colin Gawel)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bloggin
January 14, 2010 11:13 AM
Great News!!!!
I bet that it will be passed before the State of the Union
address next week.
I am sure the ads for the benefits of Healthcare Reform are all but done, and waiting for final details and passage to get them on the air.
Could it be the 'socialist' talking point is just about selfish people who are frustrated that they can no longer see themselves as 'superior' to others, who were restricted from or could not afford healthcare for their families?
Especially since the positive aspects(FACTS) are overwhelmingly beneficial short and long term to the American public.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Flybynite
January 14, 2010 3:03 PM in reply to Bloggin
SOTU will be in early Feb., I believe. I wish I could share your optimism. Everything about this bill has always taken eons longer than it was supposed to, I doubt we'll close on an exception. If we close (finger-crossing, wood-knocking etc.).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 14, 2010 11:15 AM
This seems hopeful. Does anyone know how long it will take the CBO to score this compromise? They seemed to take forever the last time they were asked to figure something out. I'm hoping that since they just have to score the parts that have been revised, it will go a lot quicker this time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 14, 2010 11:23 AM in reply to barbara63
Maybe, maybe not. Not to add fuel to the "It's as big as War And Peace" meme, but the final product will be big. It will also be complicated, with a lot of moving parts that need to work together. Add to that the fact that assumptions change as facts mature. They may feel the need to score this from scratch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 14, 2010 3:01 PM in reply to EastWest
Thank you for your kind response. I was hoping the CBO scoring process would take all of 15 minutes, but I guess I was wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve S
January 14, 2010 11:24 AM
Assume they get a compromise and it gets scored by the CBO.... What are the steps after that? What steps are subject to potential filibuster or prolonged delays?
Related to this, is the ping-pong approach still under consideration?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
January 14, 2010 3:43 PM in reply to Steve S
1. House brings this bill to a vote and votes on it. Needs a simple majority (218 out of 435) to pass.
2. Senate votes to invoke cloture (60 votes required)
3. Senate votes to bring bill to floor (51 votes required)
4. After debate, Senate votes to invoke cloture again to bring bill to a vote (60 votes required)
5. Senate votes to pass bill (51 votes required)
6. President Obama signs bill into law.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
January 14, 2010 11:38 AM
Great!! A health care bill that nobody wants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
January 14, 2010 12:20 PM in reply to Silence
Great!! A health care bill that nobody wants.
"Everybody" in this case being synonymous with semi-literate deranged teabaggers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Doomer252
January 14, 2010 11:51 AM
Let's see. Will my health care costs go up or down ? Gee. Here I am a middle class fellow just getting by. I thought I might buy a house one of these days. I don't have that much money. After all, I took the job with the BENEFITS. Oh. Those will be taxed. Good bye little house. Good bye middle class. Good bye.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
January 14, 2010 12:13 PM in reply to Doomer252
Let's see. Under the current system, my health insurance costs go up every year and I can't switch insurers due to pre-existing conditions. Gee. Here I am a middle-class self-employed fellow with NO benefits. If the cost of health insurance increases beyond affordability or it my insurer decides to find a loophole in my contract and cut me off, and maybe try to sue me for payments they made in the past. They do that when they want to avoid paying a big claim. One major illness and I could lose my house one of these days. Then I wouldn't have any money.
Goodbye.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
texscubarat
January 14, 2010 11:56 AM
Speak for yourself. After this is passed and people start seeing the bennies, people like you will be silent. Look at SS, Medicare/Medicaid, etc... all the right wingers were against them. How many have (or are currently) benefiting from these programs. Such hypocrites.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RTM
January 14, 2010 3:06 PM in reply to texscubarat
I have family in Canada that touted their socialist health program at first back in the 70s ...
Then the taxes became onerous and they have now moved to the US to get away from it ....
Yup it's great until it starts to wreck the place ...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 14, 2010 12:04 PM
Where's Jim "Waterloo" Demint now?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Skybolt
January 14, 2010 12:08 PM
It's most likely that the House will have to pass the Senate bill without changes. I don't see why Nelson or Lieberman would be willing to accept any changes now. They made it very clear that they wouldn't vote for anything even slightly more progressive. If there are changes made in conference, they have to vote in the Senate again, which means they can filibuster again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Elizabeth2
January 14, 2010 1:16 PM in reply to Skybolt
I agree -- at least about Lieberman (Nelson might not want to be "the one" that destroyed health care).
But .... damnit, even the Senate bill is a start, a good one and there's no going back at that point: only future changes with a less-terrified public weighing in on proposed changes.
AND, frankly, a part of me would be damn pleased if the Dems did manage a word-for-word passage of the Senate bill and effectively get close to the best change that could be gotten *and* deprive Lieberman, Nelson and many other Senators a chance to be bombastic and occupy that intoxicating spotlight. it would just be healthy in a way to have Dems exhibit that they can be agile enough, strategic enough to get it done. So .... if word-for-word passage of the Senate bill isn't the end of the world (and I really don't think it is), the ones standing in the way of a fairly certain achievment are those in the House currently chanting (as *they* occupy the spotlight): "Not good enough" Threading the needle, indeed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
January 14, 2010 12:33 PM
One question. Although BS/BC operates in both states, employees who live in a neighboring state must pay an additional $2,500 for their policies. State line, out-of-network issue.
I assume this problem will be addressed in the Dem bill, correct? Certainly, the reps who care so much about working families wouldn't overlook this problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
January 14, 2010 12:50 PM
I admit I haven't read the bill. My concerns are multiple, but one fairly straightforward one is cost: is this going to provide the kind of coverage I have now? You're insured, but you can't use the insurance for anything expensive without making choices like: should I fix my car or get treated for X and start paying my $4,000 deductible (with co-pays)? I know the legislation provides subsidies, but (if my understanding is correct) these kick in only after you've met all the minimum requirements (out of pocket expenses) of the plan you've chosen (bronze for most working people).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
January 14, 2010 2:01 PM in reply to Tanjaoui
The subsidies are entirely for buying coverage, not out of pocket expenses. And if you already have coverage, it doesn't provide any more.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
January 14, 2010 2:16 PM in reply to midnight rambler
Well...yikes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlyingSquirrel
January 14, 2010 12:50 PM
Do we know if the Senate negotiators are in touch with Lieberman, Nelson, and other Conservadems to make sure they don't back out at the last minute on this?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
akfred
January 14, 2010 2:08 PM
I am a little lost on this great bill, insurance run by the gov and it will be run by the GOV.
This will be brought to you by the same people that run social security, HUD, medicare/medicaid, education and the list goes on. All of which are billions in the hole. The gov can not run itself and people want to give over their healthcare so it can be run by, well idiots.
This plan will save billions. Ok lets put the breaks on and think about this for just a minute. Show me where it will save billions, heck just show me where it will save hundreds. Someone will have to pay for this, taxing industry probably will not work. From just a business stand point, no business pays taxes, the consumer does. Raise taxes on business and you only raise taxes on yourself. I understand the health insurance industry is out of control, but letting the gov run a health care insurance program is like trapping a fox then saying "just to punish you I am going to put you in my hen house, because I know you will not kill my chickens". Then you are surprised when you open the hen house, all your chickens are dead and the fox is gone.
This is not rocket science, fix the health insurance problem, do not add a gov program that once it fails, it can not be reversed and that is what this is. Once in place this bill will never go away no matter how bad it is.
I hope I am wrong, but history says otherwise.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?