Democrats save core of health proposal
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats yesterday preserved the essence of their proposal to reinvent the health care system, but Republicans scored political points on several issues, like the effects of the bill on older Americans.
The Democrats beat back Republican attacks on the legislation as the Senate Finance Committee deferred some of the most contentious issues to next week.
By a vote of 14 to 9, the committee rejected an amendment by Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, that would have prohibited the federal government from defining the specific health benefits that insurers must offer. The government would prescribe a minimum package of benefits under all health bills pending in Congress.
On the other side of the Capitol, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said yesterday that Democratic leaders were considering a tax on high-cost health insurance policies to help finance coverage of the uninsured.
The bill pending in the Senate Finance Committee would raise more than $200 billion over 10 years by imposing such a tax on health plans with premiums exceeding $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families.
Three House committees approved comprehensive health care bills in July. Pelosi met for three hours yesterday with her leadership team and with chairmen of the three committees, who are trying to reach a consensus before they take a bill to the House floor this fall.
When the Finance Committee resumes work next week, it will tackle dozens of proposed amendments.
The committee chairman, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, had said the panel yesterday would take up the explosive question of whether to create a government-run insurance plan, to compete with private insurers. But he decided to put the issue off until Tuesday.
Republicans did not prevail on any amendments to which Democrats objected. But Senator Michael B. Enzi of Wyoming said he and other Republicans had effectively publicized two messages: that the bill would do little to bring down the cost of insurance and that it would, in effect, tap Medicare to help pay for coverage of the uninsured.
A Congressional Budget Office report analyzes possible effects of the legislation on premiums in the individual insurance market. Such premiums, it said, “would tend to be higher’’ because “the new policies would have to cover preexisting medical conditions and could not deny coverage to people with high expected costs for health care.’’
However, the report noted that some people with serious illnesses did not buy insurance now because they could not afford the premiums.
Kyl said that federal benefit mandates would increase the cost of insurance. Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan, said such requirements were needed because many insurance policies did not cover important services like maternity care.
Kyl said, “I don’t need maternity care.’’ But Stabenow said, “Your mom probably did.’’
Public access to the text of the legislation has emerged as an issue. Pelosi said the legislation would be posted on the Web for lawmakers and the public to read and review for at least 72 hours before the House votes. Baucus agreed that a detailed summary of his bill, in plain English, would be publicly available before a final committee vote.
