Breakthrough: Health Care Talks Advance In Senate

Senate negotiators emerged from a full day of meetings Tuesday saying they had made genuine progress toward a deal on health care reform.

They declined to outline the specifics of the agreement, but said that the measures they had been discussing will be sent to the Congressional Budget Office for cost estimates. Once the estimates are returned, the final deal will be put together.

"We have made a lot of progress. There's a lot of agreement. We have decided to take the next step and that is to ask the CBO to score what we've been discussing," said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), one of five conservative Democrats negotiating with five liberals.

The discussion has focused on abandoning or greatly narrowing the public health insurance option. In exchange, people 55-64 would be able to buy in to Medicare and Medicaid eligibility would be expanded to people within 150 percent of the federal poverty line. And people within 300 percent of poverty would be eligible for a program pushed by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) modeled on her state's Basic Health. Cantwell is not one of the ten in the meetings but has stopped by to brief negotiators.

Senators, after the meeting, would not confirm which elements of the discussion were sent to CBO. Much will depend on the results of the CBO analysis.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), one of the liberal members in negotiations, said that he was happy with where the talks had gone.

"I've got a smile on my face. I don't smile naturally," he said.

Carper, standing nearby Rockefeller, declined to answer questions until Rockefeller finished and leaned into the scrum to get closer. "I want to hear what he says," Carper said.

"We have a broad agreement," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters, refusing to give any details on the talks, Reuters reported.

Reid said reports the government-run "public option" had been dropped were "not true."

"Not everyone is going to agree with every piece we sent over" to the Congressional Budget Office, he said, adding: "Is the end in sight? The answer's yes."

Reid's office subsequently released a written statement on the compromise:

I asked Senators Schumer and Pryor to work with some of the most moderate and most progressive members of our diverse caucus, and tonight they have come to a consensus.

It is a consensus that includes a public option and will help ensure the American people win in two ways: one, insurance companies will face more competition, and two, the American people will have more choices.

I know not all 10 Senators in the room agree on every single detail of this, nor will all 60 members of my caucus. But I know we all appreciate the hard work that these progressives and moderates have done to move this historic debate forward.

I want to thank Senators Schumer, Pryor, Brown, Carper, Feingold, Harkin, Landrieu, Lincoln, Nelson and Rockefeller for working together for the greater good and never losing sight of our shared goal: making it possible for every American to afford to live a healthy life.

As is long-standing practice, we do not disclose details of any proposal before the Congressional Budget Office has a chance to evaluate it. We will wait for that to happen, but in the meantime, tonight we are confident."

Public option supporter Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) told reporters "he didn't like the agreement but would support it to the hilt in an attempt to pass health care legislation," the AP reported. Likewise, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), who has aggressively backed a public option, said in a statement, "I do not support proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with a purely private approach. We need to have some competition for the insurance industry to keep rates down and save taxpayer dollars."

The New York Times reported on additional details:

Democratic aides said that the group had tentatively agreed on a proposal that would replace a government-run health care plan with a menu of new national, privately-run insurance plans modeled after the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, which covers more than eight million federal workers, including members of Congress, and their dependents.

A government-run plan would be retained as a fall-back option, the aides said, and would be triggered only if the new proposal failed to meet targets for providing affordable insurance coverage to a specified number of people.

The agreement would also allow Americans between age 55 and 64 to buy coverage through Medicare, beginning in 2011.

Earlier on Tuesday evening, the Senate beat back an attempt by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to attach extremely restrictive abortion provisions to the health care bill now entering the final stages of negotiations.

The stronger restrictions were modeled after language pushed in the House by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), a member of a secretive evangelical organization, some of whose members live together in a house on C Street on Capitol Hill.

Nelson routinely seeks out packs of reporters and speaks at length until questions are exhausted, but following Tuesday's 54-45 vote, he slipped out the back of the Senate chamber to head for negotiations between five liberal and five conservative Democrats going on in a room across from Majority Leader Harry Reid's office.

A few reporters waiting outside the door asked him how it would effect his decision on whether to support the final effort.

"I want to continue to work on this," he said, not ruling out his support, at least "not at this point in time. I want to continue to work on the project we're working on... This makes it harder right now [to support the bill]. We'll have to see if they can make it easier."

The Hill reported that Harry Reid "delivered a lengthy, emotional floor speech" arguing against the amendment.

"I don't believe that the Senate needs to go as far as this amendment would take us," Reid said. "No one should use the health care bill to expand or restrict abortion. No one should use the issue of abortion to rob millions of the opportunity to get good health care. This is not the right place for this debate. We have to get on with the larger issue at hand. We have to keep moving toward the finish line and cannot be distracted by detours or derailed by diversions."

Comments

[429freckles]

06:57 PM on 12/10/2009

I still say... single payer medicare for all is the only feasible way to equally divide cost & deliver healthcare to everyone.

[tkeyser]

06:49 AM on 12/10/2009

It better kill the public option.

I want my insurance company competing against other insurance companies not the government.

I want choice, many choices. Unfortunately, the Dem's wont have it, they just want all our money to go to the government, as usual.

Let me buy across state lines!!!! NOW!!!!

[rgilley]

05:24 AM on 12/10/2009

Now that democrats and republicans have killed any hope of real health care reform they will both tell us what a great bi-partisan job they have done for the American people, as they hand 40 million new customers to the insurance companies with no strings attached.
We Really need to rid this country of these people once and for all.....Obama, first!

[grifter180]

01:58 AM on 12/10/2009

It will be a sad day for democrats and Americans alike wean the public option is finally killed in the senate proving once again that Washington is totally powerless to change one of the most important economical injustices we have ever faced. It seems the fear of socialism, death panels and high cost will prevent uninsured Americans the promise of a once load and confident president who stood his ground wean it came to the public option being passed in health care legislation but now neglects to even mention it in resent speeches. When will we figure out that our government spends ten times more on putting bullets in the heads of people we never know then it does on its own people not to mention how it caters to big business bailing it out like George W.’s daddy bailed him out of a drunk driving charges back in the seventies. I can’t remember who said this but I could not agree more “Its socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor” I have been underemployed my whole life I wonder if the government will bail me out? Oh wail I forgot I don’t even have health insurance if I get sick I am just supposed to die.

[Artemis34]

11:19 PM on 12/09/2009

If we're going to expand existing government care, VA care should be extended to all veterans.

You know, the G W B administration took a page out of private insurance book and attributed things like traumatic brain injury and PTSD to "pre-existing" condition, so no VA care! Really despicable.

[rgilley]

06:17 AM on 12/10/2009

The Bush crima family is despicable!!

[globality]

07:28 PM on 12/09/2009

I just hear don hardball that the deal is

1) Office of personal management set up plan run by private companies a non profits

2) If not enough companies participate it triggers option

3) Medica buy in at 55

4) 90% of premiums must go for medical care

Not that bad of a deal. I have been sceaming for a public option, but I would consider this a victory

[meko]

07:36 PM on 12/09/2009

triggers have never been triggered. Not on base closings, not on pharmaceutical prices to Medicare. They don't work.

Letting insurers dump the old and the sick onto Medicare while forcing the young and healthy to buy from private monopolies does them a favor. don't count on Medicare expansion. insurers won't let those young healthy premium payees go. They are happy to just give taxpayers the sick ones.

[meko]

07:39 PM on 12/09/2009

The OPM runs the federal plan, which has gone up at the same rate of any large business' plan - a lot. there is no leverage here to bring down costs.

[globality]

07:44 PM on 12/09/2009

The fact that these plans will be run as non profits and the fact that 90% of premiums would go to healthcare is good.


As far as dumping the sicker 55-64 age group, It will reduce rates for others and the 55-64 group goes to single payer which is what a lot of us wanted anyway

of course we have to see if these are truly the provisions and if there are any loopholes

[Flavor]

06:47 PM on 12/09/2009

Until, we the people tell them this, change won't occur. Definition of servant- one employed to assist in domestic matters. Serve- to work as a servant; to be of service to; to satisfy the requirements of; to perform the duties of an office; to be a servant; to form the duties of employment, office,ect; to wait on others. There will not be a change until our represenatives, know that we mean buisnees, each one is a servant and they are to serve, & not treat us as if we are to serve them, and this has only happen because we allowed it. Servant, should be plastered on the front of each Congressman/women office, with the definition of it's meaning, next to it. These men/women are on an assignment, that require each one to perform a duty, one that each of them say they are qualified to perform, their duties do not require for them to allow the lobbist to speak for the people & for that matter, any croanies. When they are sworn in, they are sworn in to get to work on their assignment & that is make right choices for the people and listen to what the people want. Now are you seeing yourself being served, or are you doing the serving all the time, by begging for affordable health insurance, from the servant.

[niws]

06:52 PM on 12/09/2009

Wall of text, not nice.

[Flavor]

06:58 PM on 12/09/2009

If you got the point so will they, very nice.

[normalintexas]

06:42 PM on 12/09/2009

Weiner, Sanders, Rockefeller, Dean, Krugman are okay with it.

[Brute]

06:40 PM on 12/09/2009

Please explain how Obama/Congress expects to lower Medicare eligibility from 65 to 55, enrolling millions of more people......while slashing 500 BILLION from the same program (without rationing services) and have it be deficit neutral?

Bueller? Bueller?

[normalintexas]

06:11 PM on 12/09/2009

Wendell Potter...has just condemned this plan on Ed Schultz. Paraphrasing him: This is a lobbyist bill.

[niws]

05:49 PM on 12/09/2009

Amazingly the Chis Matthews just had an outstanding interview with Alan Grayson.

In the interview he simplified (by chance) the dem divide on the policies going on right now.

I'll try to reiterate:

Simply put, the are radical dems that want everything done now or they consider it a failure if it's not.

I consider these people the exact counter opposite of neocons. Passionate yet become their own worse enemies.

Then there are progressives who want to make changes in steps i.e. progressively.

IMO not in support of shocking the system but would much rather adjust to what the general public wants/needs without losing the core beliefs and values.

Anyways, it was a good interview and that is my interpretation on a good point Chris made to Grayson.

[BeJebus]

05:36 PM on 12/09/2009

My faith in BeJeBus will get me through this betrayal.

[Solja]

05:25 PM on 12/09/2009

All they need to do is expand Medicare (check), expand Medicaid (check?), create a "pool" for small business owners to all join together to have the best bargaining power (Sen. Lincoln's plan).

With that, everyone over 55 will have coverage. Everyone who works for a small business will be covered. And everyone at a certain income level relative to the Fed. poverty level should be covered. Anyone else who happens to fall through the cracks should ALL be able to join a group plan funded by the gov't. initially but ran by some not-for-profit org or even the OPM, who runs the Fed. gov't. employee's health plan. Who is left out?

[Solja]

05:14 PM on 12/09/2009

Okay folks. NOW is the time to get on those phones and CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN! This compromise is NOT even close to what we need. If Moveon, Progressive Congress, etc. is saying that it's a insurance giveaway, and then the folks in Congress are saying it's some magical breakthrough along with the media, who do you believe? I'll go with Moveon who sent out an email today saying for EVERYONE to get on the phones and call your Senators and tell them that THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!

PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS! THE TIME TO COMPLAIN TO THEM IS RIGHT NOW!

[floridalib]

05:07 PM on 12/09/2009

The senate is a joke, and outdated system of governance at its finest. We can poll the American people in one day to select a President, why do we need these grumpy old people to decide what we should have?? They do not represent the people, and polling shows it.

[Solja]

05:17 PM on 12/09/2009

You can thank the Forefathers for setting up a system that crooked politicians have been gaming for years. You're absolutely right. They do NOT represent the people because polls show that the majority of Americans want a public option but these people don't listen to that. They only listen to BCBS, United Health, Aetna, etc.

If there were only a way to protest the insurance companies by simply not buying their "products". This is the problem.

[rgilley]

06:31 AM on 12/10/2009

Our system is a good system. The only problem is that it's been turned into a dictatorship run by two parties. Thus, they want us to think the only solutions arise from "either or." No 3rd 4th or any other choices. With this system and the perversion of capitalism to include the greed Reagan engendered the two parties are able to give no alternative but take what they throw under the table. If we do not vote them out of office now and change the system to benefit all Americans, we will lose the right to do that through any meaningful vote. George Bush hinted at such a system many times.
It would be very easy for them to take the right of most Americans to vote: example, if you have an unpaid fine you can't vote. Think they wouldn't try that? Don't bet your freedom on it!