House Democratic leaders delay healthcare bill in response to "blue dog" and business opposition

-Do I detect a missing backbone? It will be a rollcall vote. Anyone who votes against a bill with a strong public option will do so at their own peril, Democrat or Republican. If you give them an inch, they will demand a foot, if you give them a foot, they will demand a yard, if you give them a yard, they will demand a mile. That's how it works.-


------------------------------------

Democrats Delay Health-Bill Rollout in Clash on Cost
By James Rowley

July 10 (Bloomberg) -- Democratic leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives are trying to quell a rebellion over the cost of health-care legislation by dozens of members of their own party.

In a letter to party leaders, the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of self-proclaimed fiscally conservative Democrats, raised “strong reservations” about the draft of a bill they said would fail to sufficiently reduce health-care costs and may hurt doctors and hospitals. The leaders postponed today’s scheduled release of the draft, as well as a House Energy and Commerce Committee debate that was expected to begin Monday.

The objections from Blue Dog Democrats will require the legislation’s authors to revise the measure, said the aide, speaking on condition of anonymity. Democrats hold a 255-178 advantage over Republicans in the House.

In their letter yesterday, the Blue Dog Democrats said cost-cutting should be “much more aggressive” in the legislation, which has had a price tag of at least $1 trillion.

And referring to Obama’s push to extend coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans, the group said, “We cannot ‘add’ new consumers to a broken system.”

The coalition said another idea Obama has endorsed -- setting up a new government-sponsored insurance program to compete with private insurers -- should reimburse doctors at market rates to ensure continued quality of care.

A public-option that resembled the government’s Medicare program for elderly Americans “would negatively impact hospitals, doctors and patients,” the letter said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, Democratic Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina and other party leaders met with Representatives John Tanner of Tennessee, Dennis Cardoza of California and other members of the Blue Dog Coalition yesterday to try to preserve support for the plan to create the publicly run insurance program.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a_YrQo4whBFQ

-------------------------------------

Conservative Democrats are demanding significant changes before they will support a sweeping health care overhaul, forcing the House to join the Senate in stalling Obama's top domestic priority.

The "Blue Dog Democrats" group released a list of demands on the eve of House Democratic leaders' planned unveiling of their final bill Friday. The bill release was pushed back to next week and Democratic leaders spent part of Friday meeting with the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs to work through their concerns.

In the House, Democratic leaders had hoped to release an ambitious bill Friday that would achieve Obama's goals of holding down health care costs and extending insurance to the 50 million people who lack it. Insurers would have to cover all comers, employers would be required to offer insurance and individuals would be required to purchase it, with subsidies for the poor. The tax-writing Ways and Means Committee met throughout the day Thursday to try to finalize plans on how to pay for the plan, with an income surcharge on high-earners of some 3 percent or more emerging as the leading option.

But the move by the Blue Dogs scrambled the equation. It was unclear whether Democratic leaders would be able to satisfy the group's demands since in some cases they're far apart from draft language produced by the three House committees writing health legislation.

With House leaders scrambling to address moderate Democrats' concerns, business groups increased the pressure on House leaders with letters objecting to pivotal parts of the evolving plans.

The National Coalition on Benefits, representing major business groups and companies like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AT&T, told House leaders that business would be hurt by requiring employer coverage of workers, creating a public insurance plan and other proposals.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jlMpJGn28kqCcgU-aGcYE_ZHW-ywD99BPGA01

What are the arguements being made against a public option. Why are they not being made. Maybe they should make honest arguements for why they want the insurance monopoly to continue, rule by the few, one share of stock one vote.

Its no different then a fillabuster, but they are not being made to do it. The only reason they want a delay is because they don't want what the public wants.

Period.

It's an issue for rural areas, and once rural areas that are now practically suburbs (which many of the Blue Dogs represent).

Medicare reimbursement rates vary from area to area. There's no 'blanket' federal fee structure. And it's way out of date.

We could punch one big hole in their opposition to a public option by addressing this.

Many members of Congress *actually* hold office hours over the break. This would buy some time for public option / single payer advocates to push for a bigger base of support in Congress when it re-convenes.

I see one Blue Dog coalition member has spoken up for a public option.

And, to be honest, some of their concerns merit a look. Medicare reimbursement rates are antiquated and based on local cost-of-doing-business formulas. They are not uniform nationwide. People don't realize that.

It's affordable for beneficiaries, such as I, and can well remain so given any expansion. And I support Medicare-for-all, bottom line.

Yet docs in my county *still* get reimbursements based on a 'rural' Medicare formula. Find a home under $500,000 or an apartment under $1,200 and let one of them know. We've outgrown our rural cost of living. Medicare hasn't reviewed - or revised - their reimbursement rates for years.

That ought to change.

I suggest we counter the Blue Dogs in our party with a commitment to review and adjust Medicare reimbursement rates to reflect today's economic reality.