WASHINGTON — The Senate is ready to begin a volatile,
high-stakes health care debate that’s sure to be punctuated by tense and
unpredictable battles over some of the most incendiary issues in American
politics today.
Debate on the $848 billion bill to overhaul the nation’s
health care system is expected to start next week, after the Senate returns
from its Thanksgiving recess, and many lawmakers already consider it a golden
opportunity to win long-sought projects and local aid for their constituents.
The flashpoints will be familiar — abortion, federal
deficits, government involvement in health care decisions and other hot topics
— and many Democrats already have said they want to see, and are
well-positioned to seek, changes in the bill.
In fact, the legislation is moving ahead only because it got
60 votes Saturday night to proceed — the minimum needed — two weeks after the
House of Representatives’ version squeaked through by five votes.
“I, along with others, expect to have legitimate
opportunities to influence the health care reform legislation that is voted on
by the Senate later this year or early next year,” said Sen. Blanche
Lincoln, D-Ark., who was Saturday’s 60th vote to break a Republican filibuster
and start debating the bill.
(BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM)
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., was the 59th vote, and the bill
could provide her state with an estimated $300 million in help for health care
for the poor.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., got the bill altered Friday so more
people would have access to its health exchanges, marketplaces where consumers
could shop for coverage and rates. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., was said to be
pleased that the bill lacked changes in federal antitrust law protection for
the insurance industry.
They all voted yes Saturday, saying they were motivated by a
desire to let debate proceed, but many Democrats still had qualms.
“There is a great deal more work that needs to be
done,” Landrieu said, particularly to help small businesses.
Democrats can expect little help from Republicans, who stuck
together Saturday to oppose proceeding and vowed that Democrats would pay a
political price if the bill remained largely intact.
“This 20-pound bill is the size of most people’s
turkeys next week,” said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., “and that’s what
most people in North Carolina think of this bill.”
The measure would require most people to obtain insurance
coverage. It would set up health insurance exchanges and offer them the
alternative of a government-run program, or public option. In most cases,
people would pay fines if they didn’t get coverage.
At least four areas are likely to be major flashpoints:
—Abortion. At least four Democratic senators are considered
staunch abortion foes, and they’re likely to be uncomfortable with the Senate
bill’s provisions that allow abortion coverage in federally subsidized plans,
as long as only private funds are used to pay for such coverage. The House
legislation is more restrictive.
—Public option. The plan in the Senate bill, which would
allow states to opt out, makes a lot of Democrats nervous; at the moment, it
lacks the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles.
“Who pays if it fails to live up to expectations?”
asked Lincoln.
—Budget deficits. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office estimates that the bill would cut $130 billion from the deficit over 10
years, but many experts and legislators are skeptical that it can achieve that
without cuts in Medicare and other programs that politicians are unlikely to
make.
—Affordability. “Many Americans will be required to
purchase health insurance that is more expensive … than the coverage they
currently have,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a GOP moderate.
The CBO did find that people enrolling in the public option
“would typically have premiums that were somewhat higher than the average
premiums for the private plans” people could buy through the new
exchanges.
Despite all these controversies, Democratic leaders said
that near-universal coverage legislation, a goal of party leaders since the
1940s, has now proceeded farther than ever before.
Via McClatchy-Tribune News Service.
