At 7:07PM ET today, the Blue Dogs final wish list [pdf] was passed by the Energy and Commerce Committee on a voice vote of 33/26 [pdf].
Three democrats voted aside their colleagues on the amendments: Eliot Engel (D-NY17), Bart Stupak (D-MI-1) and Jane Harman (D-CA-36). Of these, only Harman is a member of the Blue Dog Caucus but has stepped aside the caucus on the issue of healthcare reform.
over the fold we go
In a press statement released after the vote, Harman explains:
Though the amendment passed, in Harman’s view it significantly weakens a key provision of the bill – the public health insurance option.
"I have long made clear my disagreement with the Blue Dog Coalition’s position on healthcare reform. I vigorously opposed the Coalition’s so-called "trigger" on the public option, and fortunately it was not in their amendment. Nevertheless, I worry that the public option is weakened by changes contained in this amendment, and my "no" vote signals my hope that Congress will ultimately pass the most robust possible public option – which I believe is the key to fostering competition, quality, availability, and affordability of health insurance."
Calls to offices of Reps Stupak and Engel were not returned.
Several Energy Committee republicans had sharp words for the democratic Blue Dogs and their final product including Rep. Gene Green (R-TX-9):
You allowed the Blue Dogs in and you allowed them to pick the color of the lipstick that's goin' on this pig. That's about all you got.
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/...
Apparently underwhelmed, committee member Michael Burgess (R-TX-26) twittered:
Blue dog amendment is pretty underwhelming given all of the sound and fury surrounding them this past week
So, as Green would say, what's in this pig?
Think Progress posted their analysis on the compromise on Wednesday which has not appeared to change.
The TP analysis addresses private non-profit co-ops in the compromise bill passed today (here [pdf], p. 12, line 13) allowing set up of state-wide co-ops and allowing for loan and grant moneys to be provided for start up. The bill does, however, add that state governments are not privy to this section. It also gives priority to state-based (versus regional) co-ops, thereby allowing regional co-ops.
The bill also addresses end-of-life planning issues (see above link, p. 25, line 18) and believe me, the deathers won't be happy, though surely they will find some excuse to continue to claim that seniors will be forced to die with a kill pill or some other such nonsense.
The compromise clearly makes enrollment in the public option voluntary. (at link above, p. 28, line 8.)
The majority of damage appears to be financial, and generally aimed at the middle class via the lowering of subsidies while giving small businesses larger relief.
After listening to several republicans on the committee scold the Blue Dogs, I can understand why: They didn't kill it altogether, just left it crippled.
Whether the bill can be worked back to its potential whole when it hits the floor and/or through conference with the senate bill(s), is anyone's guess.