A centrist House health-care bill?

Posted: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:07 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Congress, Economy

From NBC's Doug Adams
Health care reform debate -- which has been worked on mostly behind closed doors until this point -- has hit the floor and the public today.

Video: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D- R.I., discusses the state of a health care reform bill being workshopped in Congress.

Earlier today, House Democrats released an outline of their bill. (Forgive the jargon, but it's called the "House Tri-Committee bill" because three House committees with jurisdiction over healthcare have been working on it.)

The surprising thing about the House Dems version is that it appears much more moderate than people expected, and it seems to reflect the concerns of Blue Dog Democrats and moderates who have big problems with a Medicare-like public plan.

The House Dems version does have a public/government option, but it's not a Medicare-like plan favored by liberals like Ted Kennedy. Instead, the bill will have a "public health insurance option that's self-sustaining and competes on a level field with private insurers."

The House Dems version also has a "pay or play" mandate for employers to provide health insurance to their workers, but it is not a strict as business groups had feared.

And on the third big issue -- how do you pay for all of this? -- well, House Dems avoided that one. The bill puts no new revenue ideas on the table, and doesn't even begin to talk about how to pay for it any detail.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

They should have a stream lined plan that all government workers get, and that american workers can buy into...the same plan, no better, no worse for any of those.

This is equal rights to live no matter your skin color, social status, or gender.

Congress should receive no better than "joe the patient"

GP NW Indiana (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:16 PM)

The problem with government insurance is the same as the problem is with a government owned GM. If money is needed to fund either, a billion dollar check is cut using the taxpayers money. It doesn't need to be cost-efficent. It doesn't need to improve. It doesn't need to focus on the customer. This is unfair to the private insurance companies, who unlike the government run insurance, have to make money to survive.

Unfair? You bet! Bad for the country? Absolutely!

S. Peabody (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:18 PM)

>> 3) How will it all paid for? <<

The trillion dollar question.

And don't ask us, we're tapped out.

The TaxPayers (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:19 PM)

See, that's where the problem starts for the Democrats. Until now, they've put everything on the Chinese Credit Card. The stimulus bill, the $18T deficit, the auto bailouts, the bank bailouts, all have gone on the credit card. Now the Dems have to pay for something, and they have to raise a lot of taxes to pay for it. All of a sudden the Blue Dog Democrats realize they aren't getting re-elected if this very expensive health care bills passes.

This idea will fail. People are broke. They simply cannot pay for more government run nonsense.

Danette Miller, Utah (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:23 PM)

Maybe they should go with Obama's idea to pay for half of it: Reducing the percentage of charitable giving you can deduct off your taxes for the wealthiest people. Why should the rich get MORE back percentage wise for giving THE SAME amount???? That's over $300 million right there that we give to the wealthy. We, as citizens, should be asking why this proposal was shot down. I'll take health care over inexplicably refunding more to people who are only giving in the first place for a tax break.

Lee, Austin, TX (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:25 PM)

This is utterly pure BS. It looks like the big pharma and insurance lobbies did their job. No on self sustaining option for the public.

Don in LA (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:25 PM)

Yes, how will it be paid for? Inquiring minds want to know. Those without minds may want to know too. Like the lemmings who voted for 'change' without understanding the kind of change they are about to get.

Bill, Fairfax, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:28 PM)

Cue the Republican bites in 3, 2, 1...

Oh yes, I would also like to say that I enjoy reading Nashville_Fan and Feisty Redhead's comments; they are able to convey their points, speak their minds, and elsewise without coming off in anger or bitterness. Such rare traits to find on boards these days! :-) Keep it up, you guys!!

Jonathan in Seattle (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:30 PM)

There are three big questions on health care reform:
1) Will there by a public/government? option that would compete with private plans?
2) Will there be mandates (on individuals to have coverage and on employers to provide it?
3) How will it all paid for?

Change is always met with opposition...but once it is placed into effect, all doubt and fears vanish. What will we need to pay for this? and yes, we must get the money from some place to support this funding. Tax booze and blunt(snick)...but it is a plan..it's getting late and I feel like being silly right now.

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:34 PM)

There are three big questions on health care reform:

1) Will there by a public/government? option that would compete with private plans?
2) Will there be mandates (on individuals to have coverage and on employers to provide it?
3) How will it all paid for?
4) WHAT IS THE TRIAL LAWYERS CUT?
5) ANY CAPS ON LIABILITY FOR DOCTORS, NURSES, MEDICAL DEVICE MAKERS OR DRUG MAKERS?
6) ANY TORT REFORM OR MALPRACTICE LIABILITY LIMITS?

Please answer the second largest PAC contributor to the Democratic Party- The Trial Lawyers Association. Remember Dems, they own your rear ends! Don't wind up like the Labor Union Leaders, largest PAC contributor to the Dems or you may sleep with the fishes.

Big Al in Chicago, Vote early and vote often! (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:37 PM)

How to pay for it? How to pay for it?

What makes you think that the Dems care about how to pay for it?

they don't even care that a majority don't WANT IT. the majority, in EVERY Poll, want it tabled until after the economy recovers. However, their fearless leader wants it done NOW, so of course, like the stimulus which stimulated nothing except the deficit, (and, perhaps, unemployment, a theory I read but I have not run the numbers on), it must be done, or else.

It's going to come back to haunt them in 2010, however, just like it did when Clinton was president.

no joe, no bo, nj (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:37 PM)

OBAMA NEEDS TO PROVIDE HONEST STATISTICS ABOUT HIS HEALTHCARE REFORM --- TELL US WHO THESE FIFTY MILLION WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE ARE.

WHY SHOULD I PAY MORE TAXES TO PROVIDE HEALTHCARE TO AN ESTIMATED 13 MILLION "ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS" and to those families erning more than $75,000? (That's what the critics are saying are the true numbers!)

HEALTHCARE IS A MEANS TO INCREASE WELFARE .... (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:50 PM)

[Change is always met with opposition...but once it is placed into effect, all doubt and fears vanish.
Anita, Birmingham, Alabama]
--That's nice that all doubts and fears about Reagan's reforms have long since vanished. I mean, I hardly ever hear a liberal complain about what he did anymore--that's sarcasm.

[Instead, the bill will have a "public health insurance option that's self-sustaining and competes on a level field with private insurers."]
--That would be acceptable, but I am doubtful. They have to find tax dollars somewhere, right? Now a public health plan w/o a subsidy would really show what system works better: public or private.

NIcholas: Minnesota (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:55 PM)

Also keep your eyes open for the liberal strategy of disguising insurance coverage for abortion under "reproduction services" or something similarly more "nice" sounding. Many of us will be asked to pay higher prices for insurance to cover services which assault our consciences--specifically the killing of the unborn thru abortion. We'll see how "transparent" the pro-abortion Dems are when they present this....

"Reproduction servies" = Abortion coverage (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:56 PM)

peabody more like peabrain... its about time something was unfair to the private insurance that has raped the middle class for decades. America needs national healthcare,if you want to keep your private then so be it but you will pay for it. all your arguements are strawmen that disintegrate when weighed against evidence.yes the richest in our society do have the best healthcare money can buy. its past time the rest of us regular joes were treated just as well. the congress shall provide for the general welfare of its people, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.

leon houston (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 5:00 PM)

The president has told us that it is going to take about a year before we begin to see a major turn around with the help of the stimulus package, not four months after being in office. And of course, those who are well off and have a great health insurance plan could care less about a gov sponsored health plan. No surprise there.Sure, lets wait for the economy to turn around to do something about health care, again.What were the other six or seven last president's excuse.I lost track

D in Ri (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 5:07 PM)

how ironic is it that we are paying to finance iraq's govt healthcare but when it comes to her own people, America turns a blind eye unless you're a congressman. so yea let's fund it by telling iraq they are now on their own. that's 144 billion a year, then Americans can put the money we are paying for astronomical healthcare costs into the economy and get it moving again. my family's premiums and medicines run well over 900 a month. the economy could sure use that money. why can't the average American have healthcare as great as their congressmen? and the even more astonishing question is why is any American agaibt that premise???????

leon houston (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 5:08 PM)

How to pay for it? The same way those who now have insurance pay for it. We have all been paying for health care of the uninsured for a long time. I have two working blood brothers who do not have insurance. Their employer doesn't provide and they can't afford what I have. It p....me off that I also know that they have gone to urgent care without paying the whole bill but what the heck are they supposed to do? I have to pay higher premimiums because the hospitals charge to cover all their losses. PLEASE, we need a basic care program for all. If I'm going to pay, I'd rather have it done through a common system rather than what we now have.

mexed, san antonio, texas (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 5:10 PM)

The Republicans and their ill-informed minions apparently would prefer to have insurance company bureaucrats decide how much health care they can have. Does it ever occur to them that the insurance companies' purpose in existing is to make money, not provide the best health care possible? The overhead costs and bureacratic waste are far greater in the for-profit health insurance industry than in Medicare -- and huge sums go to "compensate" the executives of the insurance companies who make sure that we do not get what we pay for. All American citizens should have the same public options that members of Congress have. Make Medicare and/or Congresscare universal!

Wisely Blue, Austin, TX (Sent Tuesday, June 09, 2009 5:21 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1958207