Senate Dems clear hurdle on health care
Photo 
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sits in his office prior to the first vote on the Health Care legislation on Capitol Hill in Washington, Sunday.
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats won a crucial test vote on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, putting them on track for passage before Christmas of the historic legislation to remake the nation's medical system and cover 30 million uninsured.
All 58 Democrats and the Senate's two independents held together early Monday against unanimous Republican opposition, providing the exact 60-40 margin needed to shut down a threatened GOP filibuster.
The vote came shortly after 1 a.m. with the nation's capital blanketed in snow, the unusual timing made necessary in order to get to a final vote by Christmas Eve presuming Republicans stretch out the debate as much as the rules allow. Despite the late hour and a harshly partisan atmosphere, Democrats' spirits were high.
"Today we are closer than we've ever been to making Sen. Ted Kennedy's dream of universal health insurance coverage a reality," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said ahead of the vote, alluding to the late Massachusetts senator who died of brain cancer in August.
"Vote your hopes, not your fears. Seize the moment," Harkin urged colleagues.
Kennedy's widow, Vicki, watched the vote from the visitor's gallery along with administration officials who have worked intensely on the issue. Senators cast their votes from their desks, a practice reserved for issues of particular importance.
The outcome was preordained after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrangled his fractious caucus into line over the course of the past several months, culminating in a frenzy of last-minute deals and concessions to win over the final holdouts, independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and conservative Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Obama's oft-stated goal of a bipartisan health bill was not met, despite the president's extensive courtship of moderate Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, the only Republican to support the bill in committee. Obama called Snowe to the White House for lengthy in-person meetings both before he left for climate talks in Copenhagen and after his return on Saturday. In the end Snowe said she was "extremely disappointed" in what she called a rushed process that left scant time for her to review, much less amend, the bill.
Even so, the vote represented a major victory for Democrats and Obama, who's now clearly in reach of passing legislation extending health coverage to nearly all Americans, a goal that's eluded a succession of past presidents. The legislation would make health insurance mandatory for the first time for nearly everyone, provide subsidies to help lower-income people buy it, and induce employers to provide it with tax breaks for small businesses and penalties for larger ones.
Two more procedural votes await the Senate, each requiring 60 votes, the first of these set for Tuesday morning. Final passage of the bill requires a simple majority, and that vote could come as late as 7 p.m. on Thursday, Christmas Eve, or the day before if Republicans agree.
Although Democrats are expected to prevail in the votes over the next several days, the final outcome remains unpredictable, because the Senate measure must be harmonized with the health care bill passed by the House in November before final legislation can be sent to Obama's desk.
There are significant differences between the two measures, including stricter abortion language in the House bill, a new government-run insurance plan in the House bill that's missing from the Senate version, and a tax on high-value insurance plans embraced by the Senate but strongly opposed by many House Democrats.
After Monday's vote a number of Senate Democrats warned that the legislation could not change much and expect to maintain support from 60 senators. House Democrats are sure to want to alter it but may have to swallow it mostly whole.
"It took a lot of work to bring this 60 together and this 60 is delicately balanced," Lieberman said.
Republicans are determined to give Democrats no help, eager to deny Obama a political victory and speculating openly that the health care issue will hurt Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections.
"There will be a day of accounting," warned John Cornyn, R-Texas, accusing Democrats of pushing a health overhaul opposed by the public. "Perhaps the first day of accounting will be Election Day 2010."
At their core the bills passed by the House and pending in the Senate are similar. Each costs around $1 trillion over 10 years and is paid for by a combination of tax and fee increases and cuts in projected Medicare spending. Each sets up new insurance marketplaces called exchanges where uninsured or self-employed people and small businesses can compare prices and plans designed to meet some basic requirements. Unpopular insurance practices such as denying people coverage based on pre-existing conditions would be banned, and young adults could retain coverage longer under their parents' insurance plans — through age 25 in the Senate bill and through age 26 in the House version.
Reid cut numerous last-minute deals to get the votes he needed and powerful Democrats also inserted home-state provisions in a 383-page package of amendments Reid filed this weekend to the 2,074-page bill.
Among other items, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., included a provision allowing residents of the town of Libby, Mont., who are suffering asbestos-related illnesses from a mining operation to get Medicare benefits. Nelson won a list of benefits for Nebraska including a commitment for the federal government to pick up the full tab of an expansion of Medicaid. And Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., who faces a difficult re-election, inserted a $100 million item for construction of a university hospital that his spokesman said he hopes to claim for the University of Connecticut.
___
AP Special Correspondent David Espo contributed to this report.
Dec 23, 2009 at 2:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
The medicare cuts won't happen in Nebraska; however. Arkansas, and Louisiana got a few hundred million tossed there way as well, for their vote. The states who have democratic senators who were hell bent to sign the bill from it's onset (like our state) or states who have Republican senators are the states who really get screwed the worse.
.
Hey; we can always move to Nebraska. It's a rather short drive. It's not all to bad of a state. Let's see they have...Uhhhhhhh;
Cornhusker football that is back on the rise again...All sorts of financial wealth with Warren buffet there in Omaha...Lot of trains; North Platte is a famous train sub station town from the Union Pacific...Uhhhh; what else?..Well, nothing more really comes to mind off hand, but hey; you'll get free health care with no cuts in medicare, all paid for by your fellow citizens from other states!
Hopefully; eventually one of the prosperous states (via their pro business/growth, and limited governmnet policies) that has been footing all the bills of other reckless states; (and a reckless federal governmnet mandating that they do so) will have the balls to secede. When that happens; I am there!
Dec 22, 2009 at 7:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustAskMe are you serious? The bill is half financed by 500 Billion in Medicare cuts...just goes to show sticking your head in the sand and hoping things will be better will not get you facts unless you look them up yourself.
Dec 22, 2009 at 4:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Stop kidding yourselves, none of you have any idea whether this will help the country or not. Just deal with it. I'll be surprised if some of you make it to year 4 with all the fits you've been having.
Dec 22, 2009 at 3:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
I sure hope Medicare doesn't take a hit from all of this healthcare reform stuff.
Dec 22, 2009 at 2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Democrats don't keep their duffel bags of cash in their mansions... they keep it in the freezer. Just ask William Jefferson, Democrat, Louisiana.
Dec 22, 2009 at 2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Russ: That's a great point!
When I was chatting with a friend about this, the 1st thing I said was "do we have the two biggest idiot Senators in the country?".
My god; do they not know the concept of LEVERAGE?? You hold all the cards when you are the 60th vote. All you have to do is come out and say "I can't support this bill now that it has a,b,c in it", and then make your demands of what you want to get your vote back.... State highway projects, federal parks, art museums, research grants, bike trails, lite rail, ext ext.....Then while you are at it, you might as well top it off by asking for a duffel bag full of cash delivered to one of your multiple mansions that most all these senators own.
Dec 22, 2009 at 2:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
I wonder if Feingold and Kohl will be able to get us some of the sugar they seem to be spreading around to the other recalcitrant Democrats. I demand Wisconsin's share of the pork...
Dec 22, 2009 at 2:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Did someone actually posted with a straight face that they believe the debt will be paid off in their life time? HAHA. Now that was one of the funniest dang posts I have ever read on hear in the 2 years that I have been on this site!
.
What; do they plan on being in one of those cryogenic chambers for 5,000 years? Yeah, maybe Ted Williams will see it paid off when the unfreeze him in 7054 AD, or sso!
Much more likely that you will see the debt surpass $100 trillion in your life time. Not to worry though, those on left now claim this is no problem. I guess they subscribe to their idol; George Soros' plan of running up the debt so high that you are forced to monetize it, destroy the dollar, and transitions to the creation of a world currency, and be part of the new global governance.
Dec 22, 2009 at 11:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
After all, we are all forced into the future at the same pace, so why not march in and at least pretend we like it.
Dec 22, 2009 at 11:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
The lawyers should sort it out before it is voted on; they are after all hired to be law makers, not law writers hoping it is legal when they are done with it---like hiring a surgeon that is not sure it will be done correctly until after he finishes cutting you up.
It is ludicrous to stick your head in the sand and "hope" it will be ok...never mind, it is pointless dealing with emotion based logic.
Dec 22, 2009 at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
The constitutionality of it will be sorted-out by the lawyers - they are actually the best source for legal issues.
Dec 22, 2009 at 11 a.m.
Suggest removal
and it's OK to cross your fingers - just in case it helps.
Dec 22, 2009 at 10:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Congress will act without your (or my) grant of authority. So lets hope for the best now. It's kinda exciting.
Dec 22, 2009 at 10:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
No where in the Constitution does it grant authority to Congress to mandate our Health Care.
This is an illegal bill concocted in the dark of night by some very corrupt politicians going even further into the abyss by making promises they can never keep and granting individual States special considerations for signing on..Sorry but I do not grant Congress authority over me..I will not bow to anyone.
Dec 22, 2009 at 9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
:-)
Dec 22, 2009 at 9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Even though Congress put us on 'the highway to hell-th' with their vote, getting a new healthcare system is a major purchase for the average taxpayer - like buying a new car or a house - It's time to get excited about seeing what our new purchase looks like. Cross your fingers.
Dec 22, 2009 at 3:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Do any of you who are for this health care bill realize that it is unconstitutional for our government to force any health care upon us or the states? Maybe if you read the constitution you would know this.
Dec 22, 2009 at 12:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
More options? There are already options for insurance. The problem is and has always been government restrictions/mandates on policies. You can't just pick what coverage you want, you are REQUIRED to purchase the government’s version (by each state) of a policy and then select the deductable you want...nothing in this bill changed any of that.
The only good thing so far is allowing insurance purchases across state lines. This however was also handcuffed/restricted; must be part of a state pool to operate, meaning you still can’t go to another state to purchase your healthcare at a cheaper rate IF you choose.
More options? There are already options for insurance. The problem is and has always been government restrictions/mandates on policies. You can't just pick what coverage you want, you are REQUIRED to purchase the government’s version (by each state) of a policy and then select the deductable you want...nothing in this bill changed any of that.
The only good thing so far is allowing insurance purchases across state lines. This however was also handcuffed/restricted; must be part of a state pool to operate, meaning you still can’t go to another state to purchase your healthcare at a cheaper rate IF you choose.
Dec 21, 2009 at 11:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
The retired citizens will get the short end of the stick in healthcare reform - especially on the state level (Wisc. Advantage Medicare).
Dec 21, 2009 at 11:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
The reformed healthcare plan will likely give us more options. Many people will finally have competative access to plans that have a much smaller premium (but increased deductables and larger co-pays per visit).
Dec 21, 2009 at 10:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
The costs of premiums are based on risk associated with the party willing to undertake underwriting a policy. The risk is based on all mandates required by government, the insured personal information, and the size of the pool (risk group) the insured belongs to.
Insurance is a gamble. The insurance company is betting you don’t get a catastrophic illness. You are concerned any large medical bill will be too much for you to pay. The same as car insurance, you hope you don’t wreck your car, but if it happens they will pay to fix it---they assume the risk and you pay the premiums for this risk.
The plan from the senate does nothing more than increase customers for the insurance industry, by making it a requirement…without reducing any costs of healthcare, which was the intention all along.
Dec 21, 2009 at 9:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
If you look at our current healthcare system, you'll notice that there are thousands of hospitals spread around the country - and even more clinics - now that is convenient. If you need care somewhere else, they'll send an EMT unit to you. The system is fine - needs no reform - until it comes to healthcare insurance premiums. There lies the problem.
Dec 21, 2009 at 8:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
It's wait and see at this time. The details of any healthcare reform are not final yet. But you can bet that healthier, longer lives for Americans will mean some of us might actually live long enough to see our national debt get paid-off.
Dec 21, 2009 at 7:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Is it 2012(election year) yet? I hope this country has enough money left to pay for the ballots.
Dec 21, 2009 at 7:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
What a hoot. The believers of this debacle think this was a good idea because now people from other countries will like it? Please.
Try removing fact from emotion here.
Currently everyone in this country has access to healthcare, guaranteed by law, with or without a job. This bill does not protect anyone's finances if the become sick and can't work---bankruptcies will not go down.
This bill does start collecting taxes NOW while not paying anything out until 2013---if we needed it now why wait to payout?
The bill plans to cut 500 billion from Medicare? If there was this much waste all these years why was it paid? Medicare was established in 1965, in 1966 the federal obligation was 3 Billion in 2009 it was 408 Billion; an increase of 12% every year for 43 years.
Yeah, but this new bill will save money...lol.
Dec 21, 2009 at 7:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
This is a monumental achievement. By combining access to healthcare with our excellent healthcare system, you end-up with a healthier America.
Dec 21, 2009 at 6:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Janesvillean...Why would Canada consider us barbaric when many of their citizens come here to get medical treatment? Seriously--I've never heard the United States referenced as "barbaric"........
Dec 21, 2009 at 6:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
NV--I know it's really hard, but try not to be so clueless:) Google the words "medicare" and "broke" and you will get around 1.5 million results. Even Obama has stated that there is over $500,000,000,000 in waste in fraud that is drowning the program--so yeah, it's a model of economic stability, isn't it????? Here's some easy reading for you....
http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/...
Dec 21, 2009 at 6:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
We are on the verge of an historic achievement that will remove this nation from its shameful status as the only nation where you lose health care when you lose your job. People from other countries, even Canada, consider us barbaric.
Dec 21, 2009 at 5:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
It is the responsibility of the government to provide for our national security.
It is the responsibility of the individual to provide for his/her own health care.
We can help people till they get back on their feet, anything beyond is not helping them but making them dependent on you forever. When do we cut the string of dependency?
Dec 21, 2009 at 4:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
FormerFlyBoy....learn to read accurately before you put others statements in quotations.
Ezoner....learn the difference between a hole and a whole.
916DWI....Read something factual about the economic stability of medicare before you comment.
All these three need is Shemp.
Dec 21, 2009 at 4:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
RAF--I would take anything that NV says with a grain of salt. In a previous health care discussion, NV stated that Medicare(basically bankrupt drowning in $500 billion of waste and fraud) was an example of a successful government program......That was a good laugh for the day!!!!
Dec 21, 2009 at 4:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Over 2,300 pages.......Can anyone begin to guess how many earmarks are packed into this thing? When the press has time to review what has been slammed into this legislation, the Democrats will be crucified......:)
Dec 21, 2009 at 3:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
just keep taxing us into communism thats what obama wants the working class with nothing the have nots equal to us and government with all the power
Dec 21, 2009 at 3:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
The quest for the Great Society continues and the left thinks the road to reach the kingdom of God goes through the fed.
Dec 21, 2009 at 3:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
If they vote to TAX & SPEND
VOTE THEM OUT IN 2010
They Promised "Change" (BAIT) and gave us "Socialism" (SWITCH).
Used Health Care & Global Warming (BAIT) to place Controls on the People (SWITCH) READ THE BILLS!
Corruption has sky rocketed and our Constitution is being ignored. Congress has no authority to mandate our Health Care. NONE!
Very Bad news for their careers
I no longer care to listen to their lies instead I will work to end their careers and RESTORE the REPUBLIC. Change they will believe in! CZAR you mad enough?
Dec 21, 2009 at 3:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Health care stocks all up HUGE again today; as this give away to big insurance is about to pass into law!! Kind of wish I would have exercised my United Health Care call options..Ahh well, 200 some odd % profit in a couple months is not to bad! Would not surprise me to much if they just keep all going up and up though..Kind of like Haloburton did when they benefited from the governmnet corruption!
One really wonders how many millions have been made ALL READY by the insurance insiders? Call option activity has been through the roof the past few months!
Dec 21, 2009 at 2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Seems the liberal democrats had no trouble throwing the elderly under the Obama bus. Take billions from medicare and medicade. Then enact a new tax to cover some more spending (for the state of Nebraska)and then tell the ins companies that they can double or triple the cost of health ins to the elderly. Its in both bills the senate and the house. How could these mindless,limp wristed,panty waist liberals treat the elderly like this. I wonder if the idiots that voted for change saw this coming? The elderly are a huge voting block in this country and I hope they make the democrats pay the price. I myself will be calling both Kohl and Feingold and venting my displeasure with thier support of this mindless bill. This is kind of like living in Ill with the style politics. The behind closed door deals all done with tax payer money. Liberals are proving they have no shame. I hope grandma don't get run over by a reindeer this year she will die in the street with this kind of goverment run program. Shame Shame Shame for not taking the time to make something workable. Maybe the liberal hear the footsteps coming already. Too bad its November before we can get rid of them.
Dec 21, 2009 at 1:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
NV -- your arguement has a whole in it. They are two different items. One is, do I want the government responsible for my personal health. NO. They other is, do I want them to protect the nation from those who wish to kill us. YES.
They both cost money. I would be willing to pay a tax to defend the country. I am not willing to pay for a gevernment takeover of 1/6 of the US economy. Think about it -- I will pay taxes to prevent the very potential of what could happen should we actually lose the batlle against terrorism.
Dec 21, 2009 at 12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Does Washington really think an American will pay premiums years before coverage. HAHAHAHAAHAH!
Dec 21, 2009 at 12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
woo hoo. one step closer:)
Dec 21, 2009 at 11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
You might know if you asked. Instead your inability to ask questions while you assume facts leads to your point of view that is mostly always wrong.
As is the case of this healthcare reform package. Nothing in it "fixes a broken healthcare system". Everyone in our country already has access to healthcare...but you didn't really want to debate the facts now did you?
Dec 21, 2009 at 11:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
“The State is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.” Or to state it more directly, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
So, we will see how that big pot-o-gold in the sky works for all the people that have lost their jobs with the Government Motors deal.
Dec 21, 2009 at 11:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
But I'm sure Mr. AirForce cares little about the billions spent fighting unwinable wars. Let's see....fight fruitless foreign wars or help Americans by moving towards fixing a broken health care system...hmmmmm?
Dec 21, 2009 at 6:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
The continuation on the travesty of more debt and taxes for the population to carry.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.