Despite House approval, health care reform faces tough battle

Despite House approval, health care reform faces tough battle

Narrow passage of a sweeping health care bill by the House of Representatives portends a continuing difficult fight for President Obama and fellow Democrats to get a bill through the Senate and into law.

The House voted 220-215 late Saturday, with 39 Democrats opposed and one Republican in favor, to approve what would be the biggest expansion of health care coverage since Medicare was created more than 40 years ago.

The Affordable Health Care for America Act, or H.R. 3962, restricts insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition or charging higher premiums based on gender or medical history. It also provides federal subsidies to those who cannot afford it. And it guarantees coverage for 96 percent of Americans, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

But turning the bill into law remains uncertain. The Senate must now pass its own version of a health care bill, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada last week signaled uncertainty over whether that will happen this year.

Once both chambers have passed a bill, a congressional conference committee will merge the two proposals into a consensus version that would require final approval from each chamber and Obama’s signature.

On Sunday, Obama praised the “historic” House vote to pass the bill and called on the Senate to “take the baton” and complete its work.

“For years, we’ve been told that this couldn’t be done,” Obama said, citing the decades of failed health care reform efforts. “Last night, the House proved differently.”

The president called the support by many House members “courageous” in the face of “the heated and often misleading rhetoric around this legislation.”

“Now it falls on the United States Senate to take the baton and bring this effort to the finish line on behalf of the American people,” Obama said. “And I’m absolutely confident that they will.”

However, Republicans and an independent senator who sits with the Democratic caucus signaled Sunday that difficulties remain for Obama on his top domestic priority.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, reiterated that he would join a Republican filibuster against a health care bill if it contains a government-run public health insurance option after the chamber’s amendment process.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” Lieberman called the controversial public option, which is in the House bill and the Senate version being prepared by Reid, an unnecessary provision intended to bring government-run health insurance in the future.

“If the public option is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow the bill to come to a final vote,” Lieberman said. He previously has said he won’t oppose opening Senate debate on the bill despite the public option provision, and he maintained that stance Sunday.

Lieberman’s stance is crucial because the Democratic caucus has the minimum 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster. Senate Republicans unanimously oppose the public option, though Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine has floated the possible compromise idea of a trigger mechanism that would mandate a public option in the future if thresholds for expanded coverage and lower costs go unmet.

The lone House Republican who supported the bill, Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, told CNN on Sunday he put the needs of his district over the desire of his party.

A lot of my constituents are uninsured. … It was the right decision for the people of my district.
–Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, R-Louisiana

Cao’s “yes” vote ended up being unnecessary for House Democrats, but it gave House Speaker Nancy Pelosi license to tout bipartisan support for the controversial measure.

“I felt last night’s decision was the proper decision for my district, even though it was not the popular decision for my party,” said Cao, a first-term representative from Louisiana’s traditionally Democratic 2nd District. “A lot of my constituents are uninsured, a lot of them are poor. It was the right decision for the people of my district.”

Cao acknowledged he extracted some White House pledges to help his district deal with the continuing effects of Hurricane Katrina in exchange for his vote. Asked about the reaction of fellow Republicans, Cao said the party’s leaders “respect my decision, and I respect theirs.”

Also Sunday, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, the chamber’s third-ranking Republican, said on the Fox program that Democrats were ignoring the wishes of the American public by pushing through the huge health care bill.

Pence said the health care bill would raise costs, increase the deficit and lead to a government takeover of the health care system.

“I think the American people are deeply frustrated with the liberal establishment in Washington,” Pence said. “If Democrats keep ignoring the American people, their party’s going to be history.”

Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland responded on the same show that the Congressional Budget Office reported that the House bill would reduce the deficit.

I think the American people are deeply frustrated with the liberal establishment in Washington.
–Rep. Mike Pence, R-Indiana

Van Hollen chided Republicans for failing to confront rising health care costs harming the U.S. economy during the years they controlled the White House and Congress.

“We’ve had a great system for insurance companies,” Van Hollen said, citing large industry profits as Americans face what he called unfair practices such as having coverage denied for pre-existing conditions. “This is a message to the American people; we’re trying to bring down your costs to help more Americans afford health insurance.”

The House vote less than an hour before midnight Saturday was full of drama. With eight seconds left in the voting period, Democrats began counting down and erupted in roars when Pelosi declared, “The bill is passed” and banged the gavel.

Republican lawmakers stood silently across the floor, some with their arms folded across their chests.

“Well, it was about what I thought it would be,” said House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio as he quickly exited.

Later, he issued a statement saying the $1.2 trillion legislation would add to the country’s “skyrocketing” debt.

“I came here to renew the American Dream, so my kids and their kids have the same opportunities I had,” Boehner said. “I came here to fight big-government monstrosities like this bill that dim the light of freedom and diminish opportunity for future generations.”

Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, released an equally tersely worded statement.

This is a message to the American people; we’re trying to … help more Americans afford health insurance.
–Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland

“Nancy Pelosi and her liberal lieutenants made a lot of promises today to get the votes they desperately needed,” he said. “Make no mistake — the Democrat leadership’s assurances were based on political expediency, not principle. Anyone receiving a promise from Pelosi is guaranteed to be disappointed in the end when their votes are no longer needed.”

Earlier in the day, Obama met behind closed doors with Democrats to shore up support for the bill, calling it a chance of a generation.

In the run-up to the vote, Republicans and conservative Democrats joined forces to pass an amendment to the bill to prohibit federal funds for abortion services.

It was considered a big win for them and for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which used its power — especially with conservative Democrats in swing congressional districts — to help force Democratic leaders to permit a vote on the amendment.

The prohibition, introduced by Democratic members — including Rep. Brad Ellsworth of Indiana and Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan — would exclude cases of rape, incest or if the mother’s life is in danger.

The GOP accounted for 174 of the votes in favor of the amendment, with one Republican voting “present.”

On the Democrats’ side, 64 voted for the measure, and 194 voted against.


Watch the video related to health care reform bill





5 Comments

  • By TomStar81, March 20, 2009 @ 4:15 am

    Yes you are talking about TORT reform. the Democrats do not want to touch the Lawyers. it seems the Lawyers are in the democrats pocket.*

  • By Tracy Turnblad, March 20, 2009 @ 4:30 am

    First of all, Obama wants to make insurance more available to all and change the system so that it is cheaper. He also wants change so that the insurance companies find it harder to get out of paying for treatment. The system he is proposing looks similar to that which works in Holland and Switzerland where private companies are involved in providing insurance.
    Second, of course universal health-cover sucks. That is why we in Western Europe have it. We think, hmm, our healthcare system sucks. I know, lets keep it. I guess that is the same with Japan and Canada as well.
    Third, Obama campaigned on reforming the healthcare system. He said he wanted to make insurance more available and he was elected by the American people to do this.

    FACT – the US has higher death rates for kids both for kids aged under one and those under five than western European countries with universal health coverage.
    FACT – American insurance companies push up prices and work to stop paying out claims on those they cover.
    FACT – the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet.
    That means that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, France, Cuba, Germany, Japan etc, all of which have universal health coverage.

    Last of all if you do not like the policies that Obama was elected to bring in, he can always be voted out of office in 2012.

  • By The Conservative Resistance, March 20, 2009 @ 10:41 am

    Under any Democrat President in history, the same M.O. emerges.

    The Democrats "identify" a "crisis" and whip the people up into a frenzy about it. They proclaim themselves the carriers of the elixir that will heroically save all mankind from this "crisis.'' When Republicans seek to oppose the spending it will take for this elixir, they are automatically called hate mongers and obstructionists.

    Clinton tried it with school lunch menus. He whipped that whole thing into some kind of "crisis." The Democrats wanted to raise the program by 10% and the Republicans wanted to raise it by 7%. That got reported in the media as a 3% CUT by Republicans. Only when a Democrat is President could an INCREASE be reported as a CUT. Just to make Republicans look bad, but too many people buy into the bullshit.

    Al Gore, who wasn't even President, tried it with global warming and it didn't work. Today, it's health care. What'll it be tomorrow? The whole "world is ending in 2012" thing, or what?

  • By skinnyblink7, March 20, 2009 @ 11:21 pm

    the new york times has an interactive feature which is actually very clear to understand. check it out.

  • By Short, Fast, and Loud, March 21, 2009 @ 1:33 am

    Obama does not have a bill. He has only given guidelines to what he wants. His last address made it more specific.

    The bills in congress are not healthcare bills. They are health coverage bills. The government is trying to take control of a large portion of our economy. They are trying to make it so the government is a single payer source (I know i will get thumbs down for this, but follow hr3200 to its logical conclusion).

    The current bills want to cover everybody in the US (Illegals too, there is nothing in these bills to prevent illegals from being covered. Amendments to ensure citizenship were tabled)

    The federal government wants to punish you for not having insurance (they will get your money one way or another)

    The government wants to regulate what care you will get. (When the system becomes overblaoted as any government system does, they will have 2 options increase taxes or ration care)

    I know that there are a lot of people that will disagree with this. If they actually read the bills, and follow to there logical conclusions, in 10 years we will be a whole lot worse of than we are now. So doing nothing would actually be cheaper.

    Reform must actually deal with the underlaying problems. HR 320o does not. Obama gave lip service to 1 of them.

Other Links to this Post

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPresss