Wyden Urges Dems To Keep Trying For Bipartisan Approach To Health Care

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Wyden Urges Dems To Keep Trying For Bipartisan Approach To Health Care stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07- 9-09 12:34 PM   |   Updated: 08- 9-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Wyden

One of the key Democratic senators whose vote remains up for grabs when it comes to health care reform urged his colleagues to continue to push for a bipartisan bill, even as party leadership said it was time to give up on recuriting GOP support.

In an interview this week with the Huffington Post, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) maintained that there was still "great interest in the Finance Committee for a bipartisan bill on both sides of the aisle" and he urged lawmakers to continue to pursue a collaborative path. He would not comment directly on news that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had urged the Committee's Chairman, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to drop efforts to attract Republican support. But he also didn't hide his own preferences.

"I'm committed to the priority that the president laid out," said Wyden. "I think the president got it right. He said 'I want to get it done this year' and he also indicated that his first choice is to have a bipartisan bill because he recognizes that a bipartisan bill allows the country to come together."

Asked whether he would support cloture on health care legislation that he would ultimately oppose -- so as to preempt a Republican filibuster -- Wyden was noncommittal.

"I'm going to just say that I think the president's right and I'm supportive of what the president said in terms of both a timetable and in dong something bipartisan," he said.

While Democrats both inside and outside of government say they expect Wyden ultimately to support the health care legislation put forth by the party, his most recent round of comments are likely to cause anxiety among progressives. The senator is one of a handful of Democrats whose thoughts on key components of reform have been difficult to pin down. On a public plan for insurance coverage, for instance, Wyden maintained that while he supports the concept, he could not commit to backing a bill because of one singular component.

"You just can't give a simple yes or no answer to that, because real health reform is so much bigger than its individual parts," he said. "And the reason I say that is that real reform means containing costs. Now the reason I'm open to a public option is that a public option is one way that could contain costs. But throughout my comments about health reform, I've never said I'm going to vote for health reform because of one component."

This type of wait-till-the-final-product approach extends to the legislation currently being crafted by the various committees in the Senate. Wyden sits on the Finance Committee, which has stalled in its efforts to produce a bill -- they are still, as The New Republic reports, trying to figure out ways to pay for reform. The HELP Committee is further along, marking up a bill that includes a somewhat limited public option and could extend coverage to 97 percent of all Americans. But Wyden said that he was worried with the legislation's potential costs.

"The $600 billion didn't involve the Medicaid additions," he said, "and it went to $1.2 trillion with that. I don't know if you've heard me outline this but I think the way the public starts this topic is by saying, 'Hey guys, you're spending enough on healthcare but you're not spending it in the right places.' And I think a big part of what health reform is all about unpacking ... showing that you can spend it more efficiently. You got to, I think, first show that you're going to squeeze more of the excessive and inefficiently spent dollars out of the system before you come up with a $1.2 trillion bill. Remember the $1.2 trillion is on top of the $2.5 trillion that's being spent now."

Story continues below
advertisement

For all the consternation such remarks are likely to cause, Wyden does hold a unique distinction within the Democratic Party. His proposal for health care reform -- the Healthy Americans Act -- actually has public, bipartisan support, including the cosponsorship of Utah Republican, Sen. Bob Bennett. The bill, which would effectively do away with the employer-based system and replace it with state-run pools of different health care coverage, has supporters on the Hill and (at least privately) in the White House. It achieves 100 percent coverage without a massive government expansion.

But strategists intimately involved in the reform battle say there is no chance that Wyden's proposal will make its way to the president's desk. "Absolutely no chance whatsoever," said one Democratic strategist. "None. Zip."

That, however, hasn't diminished Wyden's efforts to move the debate in his direction. He noted with pride that over the course of 18 months, he and Peter Orszag -- then the head of the Congressional Budget Office and now the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget -- have tried out "various iterations" of new legislation that would be both efficient and effective. Recently, he added, another senator had come on board as a cosponsor -- Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-Del.) -- which brings the number of lawmakers to14. Wyden even hints that his legislation has the president's support, too -- at least philosophically.

"[Obama] invited me to the White House a bit ago and made it clear that he had certain core principles that were very important to him. But he was very open and very flexible on the ways in which to deal with it. And I kidded him a little bit. I brought my copy of the Audacity of Hope and I showed him the section that describes giving people health care choices like (those available to) members of Congress and affordability," Wyden recalled. "I said, 'Mr. President, in the book it sounds like what you're for is the Healthy Americans Act.'"

As Wyden sees it, the key focus of the debate should remain on controlling costs in the private market, ensuring that consumers can keep their doctors regardless of what plan they enter, modernizing the medical system and providing incentives and subsidies for individuals to purchase insurance. To boil it down to an up or down vote on specific proposals, like a public option, he says, is to do a disservice to the health care debate.

"As I try to say, when I get asked about one of the individual components, it's very hard to give a yes or no answer, as much as people would like it," Wyden explains. "Real health reform is bigger than the sum of its parts."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

One of the key Democratic senators whose vote remains up for grabs when it comes to health care reform urged his colleagues to continue to push for a bipartisan bill, even as party leadership said it ...
One of the key Democratic senators whose vote remains up for grabs when it comes to health care reform urged his colleagues to continue to push for a bipartisan bill, even as party leadership said it ...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
114
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
photo

Wyden, you're a wuss. We need someone with a backbone - check out Bernie Sanders.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:01 PM on 07/09/2009
- pizzmoe I'm a Fan of pizzmoe 20 fans permalink

Why? What is this obsession with bipartisanship?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 PM on 07/09/2009

THE ETHICS OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY

(1) The health insurance industry attempts to scare people about a single payer system by asking, "Do you really want someone in government coming between you and your doctor?" -- The TRUTH is that we have been paying insurance companies monthly and then THEY come between US and PAYING OUR DOCTOR by denying coverage when we actually use the health care system.

(2) The health insurance industry says, "The reason we deny coverage is because we don't have large enough pools of people and if we can solve that problem then we can cover everyone." -- The TRUTH is that they are driven by the profit motive and the ONLY way to TRULY reduce the cost of healthcare is to remove the insurance companies' motive to lie, cheat, and steal from sick people.

(3) The health insurance industry says, "Okay, so we lie, cheat, and steal from sick people -- we wouldn't if they made better healthcare decisions when lying in an ambulance, ER, or surgery room." -- The TRUTH is, health insurance companies have intentionally made insurance plans COMPLICATED because it better allows them to deny coverage when we fail to GET PRE-APPROVAL for a healthcare intervention.

Why in the world should we trust these people with our cars much less our lives?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 PM on 07/09/2009
- Ruh17 I'm a Fan of Ruh17 4 fans permalink

I'm sorry Wyden, but the American people could give rat's as$ about bipartisan support. Do your job and stop making excuses or face the consequences.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:33 PM on 07/09/2009
- Cyclone I'm a Fan of Cyclone 8 fans permalink

'Wyden urges Dems to keep trying for bipartisan approach to health care"

NO !!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 PM on 07/09/2009
- chriss0114 I'm a Fan of chriss0114 24 fans permalink
photo

well then ask them to contribute something like how to implement a cost effective public option for ALL regardless (no triggers, no restrictions--all eligible--true competition)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 PM on 07/09/2009

It's interest who his top 5 contributors are:

Top 5 Contributors, 2005-2010, Campaign Cmte

Nike Inc $39,200 $34,200 $5,000
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $22,400 $12,400 $10,000
Banfield Pet Hospital $15,700 $15,700 $0
Pinnacle Healthcare $13,800 $13,800 $0
M Financial Group $12,750 $12,750 $0

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:08 PM on 07/09/2009

Any health care legislation that has republican backing won't benefit the people! They want a watered-down bill, so that people will blame President Obama when it's meaningless and does nothing for the people! Keep working with the big corporation's party and you won't be voted back in!

My vote will go for whoever votes for 76% of the people!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:03 PM on 07/09/2009
- heal57 I'm a Fan of heal57 25 fans permalink

The republicans are into water; watered down healthcare bill, water boarding, etc. Get some freaken guts and go for a public option you spineless jellyfish.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 AM on 07/10/2009
photo

Why do we need to be Bi-partisan with greedy, evil , upper class representatives. Because ron taking so much money from them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

Just an excuse to waffle and cover all the money he has taken from health care. Time for him to go the way of Gordon Smith. He's been in Washington too long.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 PM on 07/09/2009
- olderdem I'm a Fan of olderdem 10 fans permalink

I'm a strong supporter of the public option, given the alternatives, but I am interested in knowing more about this:

"The bill, which would effectively do away with the employer-based system and replace it with state-run pools of different health care coverage, has supporters on the Hill and (at least privately) in the White House. It achieves 100 percent coverage without a massive government expansion.­"

It doesn't say how its funded, but a ongoing problem with the healthcare system in the U.S. is the "employer based" system. When employers pays, it really means that's like a tax on U.S. labor and it makes U.S. labor less competitive than other countries.

I would support a system, single payer the best approach, that does away with employer based and funds health care with a valued added tax that would be applied to all goods and services, except food and medical and would be applied to imports as well domestically produced. Let the Chinese help pay for our health care, if we still want to buy Chinese.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:08 PM on 07/09/2009

Here's a quick rundown: http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=12&year=2006&base_name=the_healthy_americans_act

It would be payed for mostly by taxing the income you would receive from the conversion of workplace payments to insurance into pay raises.... not to many people like this but I think it's reasonable.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 07/09/2009

Why not the Healthy Americans Act + a public option trigger? Being liberal myself I was very skeptical of a bill from a moderate Democrat and a Republican but I came away very impressed after reading it. No it's not single payer but it's reminiscent of German and Swiss models, which work fine. It eliminates the counterproductive tie between the workplace and healthcare. It's the least expensive plan and revenue neutral after 2 years. The insurance industry becomes highly regulated and 99% of Americans will be covered.
I know it's not what we or President Obama(deep down) wants but we must think within the confines of what is actually attainable and single payer will not happen. What scares me is the focus we are taking towards the public option. With our eyes off the ball compromises can be made to appease the middle, making reform a watered down prospect.
Instead of starting left and going to the middle, let's start at the middle and work left. The HAA is good enough and a strong public option trigger should scare the insurance industry into not being inefficient a**holes. If they don't shape up after say 3 years then screw them!
Senators in the middle can vote for it because it's bi-partisan and fiscally responsible, and Senators on the left will (should) vote for it because it is real health care reform, and there's a public option in case things get out of hand.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:06 PM on 07/09/2009
- jsgaetano I'm a Fan of jsgaetano 203 fans permalink
photo

Goopers want to kill national health care. So what's to compromise?

We either get it without their support... or we get nothing with their support.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:04 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

Great comment - catchy - and true!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 PM on 07/09/2009

PUBLIC OPTION NOW!!!
Look at hard numbers and forward to all dems.
47 million uninsured, 20 million underinsured. Subtract 10 million uninsured poor, leaves 37 million who can pay, divide that in half: 18.5millio­n can only afford $50, 18.5 mill can afford $100, the under insured can afford $100 and get rid of their private carrier.

18.5 mill @ $50 = $925,000,000.
18.5 mill @ $100 = $1,850,000,000
20 mill @100 = $2,000,000,000.
Grand total = $4,775,000,000

That is FOUR BILLION, SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS PER MONTH in just affordable premium payments. That is OVER FIFTY SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY, just from uninsured and under insured. That does not count the countless millions who will drop their rapists to come to a public option. Then factor in that the majority of folks will be getting preventive care, not sickness treatments (less payout to a doctor for a checkup than say dialysis)

We should also introduce a 1 penney sin tax on fast food, food/drinks with high fructose corn syrup and every bottle/glass of alohol. These are just as bad for the health as cigarettes and paying a dollar for a burger instead of 99cents isn't going to put anyone into the poorhouse.

Pass these numbers on to everyone, people need to see hard numbers and stop being scared off by rationing and long lines and it'll hurt insurance companies. Heck yeah why not? We've been the ones hurting for far too long!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:47 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

The ? Ron Winden is -How much $$$ do you get from the Kaiser family ?

Kaiser Permanente Insurance - Kaiser Aluminum - The Kaiser Family Foundation

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 07/09/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect


svn