Good Day For Baucus, Bad Day For Real Reform

[Joanne98]

I’m sure Chairman Baucus, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and President Obama are all pleased that Republican senator Olympia Snowe voted for the Baucus bill in committee. Their goals have long been to pass anything they could slap the label “health care reform” on and declare victory. Sadly, Snowe’s support could signal a bad day for real reform.

Snowe has long been opposed to some of the most important elements of reform. I’m not just referring to her opposition to a real public option and her support for a worthless trigger proposal.

Snowe opposes a real employer mandate, and instead favors a disastrously stupid “free rider” provision. It could have serious consequences for low-income workers.

She is against giving the exchanges the power to negotiate with private insurance companies. This is a provision that should help keep down the cost of health care. It would save individuals money and the government money. Snowe fears it is too much government involvement. John Kingsdale, who runs Massachusetts’s exchange, called Snowe’s insistence that the exchanges not have the power to negotiate price with insurance companies a recipe for disaster.

Just today, during the committee hearing, she reaffirmed her support for “national plans.” This would allow health insurance companies to sell national plans in any states. Individuals state would lose the power to regulate these insurance plans sold in their states. The national plans would be exempt from all minimum benefit requirements mandated by the state legislature. This has been for a long time one of the top goals of the for-profit health insurance industry.

These are only the few changes that I know Snowe requested. Other good ideas, like a minimum medical loss ratio for insurance sold on the exchange, a stronger regulator, and a better defined minimum benefits package, could also have been excluded at the request of Snowe. For Example, Cantwell’s “basic health plan” amendment did not get Snowe’s vote in committee. It may be left out of the merged bill because Snowe opposes it

Continued>>>
http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/good-day-for-baucus-bad-day-for-real-reform/

[LynneSin]

1. Remember Baucus isn't the only Healthcare bill out there

that's just the Senate Finance Committee's verison of healthcare. If I'm correct there are now 5 healthcare bills out there that need to go to a joint House-Senate committee and finalized.

[damntexdem]

2. A necessary day for reform of any kind.

A bill had to get out of Finance for anything to go forward. Now, Baucus is not much needed anymore -- just to vote for cloture.

[Cha]

3. FYI

berni_mccoy (1000+ posts) Tue Oct-13-09 01:33 PM
Original message

Why Health Care Reform Dies if the Baucus Bill is Killed in Committee

Many people have asked why do we need the Senate Finance Committee... and wouldn't no bill be better than a bad bill (from this committee). The answer is simply that there will be no bill in the Senate unless the Baucus bill is passed out of committee. The HCR reform bill was referred to two committees, jointly, in the Senate and as such, they must report combined legislation. The HELP committee bill jurisdiction lies with structuring the reform, while the Finance Committee jurisdiction lies in how to pay for it. If either committee kills the bill, the bill dies, period (legal text below). If both bills pass committee, then the Senate must reconcile them in conference for a vote. If the bill passes the Senate (with 51 votes), it must be reconciled with the House version.

However, if the Senate Finance Committee kills the bill, the matter is dropped entirely (the HELP bill gets no consideration), or it is referred back to committee again, and we start from square one. Given that the players aren't going to change hands, and only one member of the Senate Finance Committee is up for re-election and Senators are on 6-year cycles, the matter will likely not be reconsidered for the next 4-6 years, if ever.

Here are the rules of the Senate which cover what will happen if the Bill fails to leave committee:

http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Rul...



RULE XVII

REFERENCE TO COMMITTEES; MOTIONS TO DISCHARGE; REPORTS OF COMMITTEES; AND HEARINGS AVAILABLE

1. Except as provided in paragraph 3, in any case in which a controversy arises as to the jurisdiction of any committee with respect to any proposed legislation, the question of jurisdiction shall be decided by the presiding officer, without debate, in favor of the committee which has jurisdiction over the subject matter which predominates in such proposed legislation; but such decision shall be subject to an appeal.

2. A motion simply to refer shall not be open to amendment, except to add instructions.

3. (a) Upon motion by both the majority leader or his designee and the minority leader or his designee, proposed legislation may be referred to two or more committees jointly or sequentially. Notice of such motion and the proposed legislation to which it relates shall be printed in the Congressional Record. The motion shall be privileged, but it shall not be in order until the Congressional Record in which the notice is printed has been available to Senators for at least twenty-four hours. No amendment to any such motion shall be in order except amendments to any instructions contained therein. Debate on any such motion, and all amendments thereto and debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than two hours, the time to be equally divided between, and controlled by, the majority leader and the minority leader or their designees.

(b) Proposed legislation which is referred to two or more committees jointly may be reported only by such committees jointly and only one report may accompany any proposed legislation so jointly reported.

(c) A motion to refer any proposed legislation to two or more committees sequentially shall specify the order of referral.

(d) Any motion under this paragraph may specify the portion or portions of proposed legislation to be considered by the committees, or any of them, to which such proposed legislation is referred, and such committees or committee shall be limited, in the consideration of such proposed legislation, to the portion or portions so specified.

(e) Any motion under this subparagraph may contain instructions with respect to the time allowed for consideration by the committees, or any of them, to which proposed legislation is referred and the discharge of such committees, or any of them, from further consideration of such proposed legislation.

4. (a) All reports of committees and motions to discharge a committee from the consideration of a subject, and all subjects from which a committee shall be discharged, shall lie over one day for consideration, unless by unanimous consent the Senate shall otherwise direct.

(b) Whenever any committee (except the Committee on Appropriations) has reported any measure, by action taken in conformity with the requirements of paragraph 7 of rule XXVI, no point of order shall lie with respect to that measure on the ground that hearings upon that measure by the committee were not conducted in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 4 of rule XXVI.

5. Any measure or matter reported by any standing committee shall not be considered in the Senate unless the report of that committee upon that measure or matter has been available to Members for at least two calendar days (excluding Sundays and legal holidays) prior to the consideration of that measure or matter. If hearings have been held on any such measure or matter so reported, the committee reporting the measure or matter shall make every reasonable effort to have such hearings printed and available for distribution to the Members of the Senate prior to the consideration of such measure or matter in the Senate. This paragraph

(1) may be waived by joint agreement of the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader of the Senate; and

(2) shall not apply to

(A) any measure for the declaration of war, or the declaration of a national emergency, by the Congress, and

(B) any executive decision, determination, or action which would become, or continue to be, effective unless disapproved or otherwise invalidated by one or both Houses of Congress.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6765334