Senate Finance Committee Approves Health Bill 14-9
 Printer-friendly
|
 Email article |
Related subjects: Healthcare Policy, Legislation, U.S. Economy, U.S. news, U.S. Politics Comments Off
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) joined every Democrat on the Senate finance committee in passing healthcare reform through to the full Senate in a 14 to 9 vote. Snowe said before the vote that “when history calls, history calls”, indicating that her vote for passage was motivated by an awareness of the historical call to make way for a more just society.
While the bill does not include a strong public option, its passage moves the healthcare reform process closer to fruition on the schedule laid out by Pres. Obama and Senate leaders. The reform debate has been dominated by allegations of a non-existent government takeover, while principled centrists like Sen. Snowe have been “completely immersed” —as one reporter who shadowed her put it— in dedicated study of the data, and of the problems that need solving.
Snowe declared today that “the consequences of inaction dictate the urgency of Congress taking every opportunity to demonstrate it’s capacity to solve the monumental issues of our time”, another suggestion that she views a broad, bold, effective reform as taking precedence over any ideological or party considerations. It also reminded observers that it was Snowe who showed her seriousness about reaching a compromise reform, to ensure a meaningful solution to the problem, by floating the idea of a public-option “trigger” to kick in if private insurers don’t make substantial enough cost reductions for consumers buying through a competitive bidding exchange.
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) says he cannot support a public option, because he is concerned reimbursement at Medicare rates could “bankrupt” hospitals in his state. He had opposed including it in the finance committee bill, arguing it could not pass, but the issue of 60 Senate votes has been softened a bit as momentum gathers for a free clinic campaign that seeks to persuade conservative Democrats to vote to end a Republican filibuster, even if ultimately they will vote to oppose the healthcare reform bill as written.
Conrad’s issue now with “Medicare rates of reimbursement” can be dealt with fairly simply, by writing slightly higher rates into the legislation. The centrist camp may also be moved closer to ultimate support for a public option by the convergence of a rigged insurance industry report pledging aggressive rate increases and on the other side, liberals —like former Vermont governor Howard Dean, MD— calling for an expansion of Medicare to those under age 65.
The public option, in light of such polarized alternatives, then comes to look more like what it’s meant to be: a non-interventionist open market alternative that will, far from rationing care, guarantee it, and which is designed to “keep the insurance companies honest”.
The first bill passed out of committee without a public option might be the sign that ultimately, the landscape of the healthcare reform debate will bow shift, and the public option may be seen as a cost-effective pragmatic solution to a problem that desperately needs fixing. At least that’s how the Democratic leadership are now gearing up to make the argument.
| Printer-friendly
|
Email article |
CafeSentido Partner Sites: