Baucus unveils health care bill

He doesn't have any Republican support, and many Democrats aren't all that thrilled, either. But Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus stuck to his deadline and this morning formally unveiled his plan to overhaul the nation's health care system.

The bill would cost about $856 billion over the next 10 years, require all individuals to purchase coverage or pay a fine, and ban insurers from charging more or denying coverage to people with health problems. It does not include the public option -- a government plan along the lines of Medicare -- but does call for nonprofit coops to compete with private insurers.

The bill would create a new exchange where consumers could compare and buy insurance plans. Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor, would be expanded.

Baucus would pay for the expansion of care with $507 billion in cuts to government health programs and $349 billion in new taxes and fees, including a new tax on generous insurance plans -- so-called Cadillac coverage -- and new fees on insurance companies and medical device manufacturers.

Click here to see "America's Healthy Future Act of 2009."

The Senate Finance bill is expected to be the vehicle for the proposals sought by the White House and described by President Obama in his speech to Congress last week.

"We will act and pass health reform legislation this year," Baucus declared as he promoted his bill in a Capitol Hill news conference this afternoon, saying that it would expand coverage, slow the rise in health care costs, and keep insurers honest.

"It follows the criteria laid out by President Obama," Baucus said, adding that the bill will eventually draw bipartisan support.

"This is a good bill, this is a balanced bill," Baucus said, calling it "a common-sense bill that can pass the Senate."

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs called the legislation an "important building block" that "gets us closer to comprehensive health care reform."

The legislation protects Medicare and preserves patients' right to keep their doctor, he continued, while keeping the deficit under control by offering the most generous coverage possible while keeping the price tag under Obama's target of $900 billion over 10 years.

Still, he acknowledged that there are "honest and principled differences" on the proposals and that his plan "may not represent all of our first choices."

UPDATE: The top House Republican wasn't buying the Baucus plan.

“It looks like the same kind of plan we’ve seen in House," said Representative John Boehner of Ohio. "It’s got a little different language, but it’s still a big government plan, it still calls for higher taxes and more spending and I don’t think it is going to get enough support to get very far in the United States Senate.”

Despite months of negotiations, however, Baucus was unable to get the three Republicans in the so-called Gang of Six to sign on. One of them, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, bemoaned what he called an "artificial deadline."

"I’m disappointed because it looks like we’re being pushed aside by the Democratic leadership so the Senate can move forward on a bill that, up to this point, does not meet the shared goals for affordable, accessible health coverage that we set forth when this process began. In addition to concerns about costs to taxpayers and affordability for individuals, there are still some serious outstanding issues that have yet to be resolved like preventing taxpayer funding of abortion services and the enforcement against subsidies for illegal aliens," Grassley said in a statement.

"On top of all that, there’s no guarantee that a Finance Committee bill, even if it becomes bipartisan, will stay that way after it leaves the committee. An overriding issue for some time has been the fact that members of the Democratic leadership haven’t made a commitment to back a broad bipartisan bill through the entire process," added Grassley, who negotiated along with Republicans Mike Enzi of Wyoming and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

But in an op-ed published in today's Wall Street Journal, Baucus said he couldn't wait any longer.

"Health care is a complicated and deeply personal issue; it takes time and effort to get reform right. Legislating every piece of this puzzle would be impossible and counterproductive," he wrote. "What we can do is seize this opportunity to put America back on a fiscally sustainable path. The Senate Finance Committee proposal builds on what already works and fixes what threatens to break the bank for future generations."

Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House, said he considers the Baucus bill "a draft" for subsequent negotiation. He said on MSNBC that the House will pass a bill that offers more protections and more coverage -- and that would also be more expensive than the Senate bill, closer to $1 billion.

UPDATE: A key Democratic group criticized Baucus's plan, saying it "absolutely fails to meet the most basic health care needs of working families and it fails to meet the expectations we have set for our nation."

"It fails to put pressure on private insurers to control health care costs. There is no history or logic behind the claim that health care co-ops would provide real competition for the giant private insurers that have a stranglehold on health coverage today," AFL-CIO president John Sweeney said in a statement.

"If you're an individual who does not purchase private health coverage, it sticks you with a hefty tax penalty even though it fails to provide sufficient subsidies to make plans affordable for low and moderate income families. But if you're an irresponsible employer who does not provide coverage, you get off scot free," he continued.

"Outrageously, the plan imposes a 35 percent tax on high-cost health care plans without prohibiting insurers from passing on the tax to consumers who happen to be in groups that are older or sicker than average or live in high cost areas.

"The Senate Finance proposal, sadly, is little more than a throwback to the failed policies of the last three decades that advantaged corporations over taxpayers and bestowed special breaks on the wealthy while ignoring the middle class. The proposal does include the important insurance reform and health care delivery system improvements adopted by earlier congressional committees, and it builds on these by reforming the way we pay for health services to focus on the quality of services instead of the quantity. But the proposal's strong points are nowhere near sufficient to outweigh its problems. However well intentioned the attempts at bipartisanship, the final product reflects the bankrupt policies of the past more than the forward-looking policies needed to drive meaningful health care reform.

"We are counting on finance committee Democrats to fix the bill and side with working families, not insurance companies."