It started out on the high note, before the weekend, with the good news that the CBO was going to estimate that "a strong public option--the kind that the House of Representatives is putting in its reform bill--should net somewhere in the neighborhood of $150 billion in savings over ten years." There was also the good news that a core group of New Dems, along with a few Blue Dogs, were supporting a "robust public option."
From there, it was a lot of rollercoaster up and down, and we end this week with the deadline of August looking unlikely.
On Tuesday, the House Tri-Committee bill was introduced, with the most controversial provision being Rangel's surtax on the nation's wealthiest familes. The good news on this House version of the bill is that it pays for itself:
According to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, the legislation would cost $1 trillion over 10 years and cover 94 percent of Americans (97% if you don’t count the undocumented).
As Jonathan Cohn reports, "between savings and a new surtax on the wealthy, the bill pays for itself. In other words, it won’t inflate the deficit." Five hundred billion comes from savings in Medicare and Medicaid and "the rest comes from a surtax on the richest 1.5 percent."
Most importantly, the CBO coverage tables undermine the conservative claim that a public option would eliminate private insurance and erode employer-sponsored coverage. The House bill actually increases the number of people who receive coverage through their employer by 2 million and shifts most of the uninsured into private coverage.
The bad side of the bill--some key provisions like the exchange and the public option, wouldn't kick in until 2013. The sausage making continues in mark-up on the House side, with Ed and Labor and Ways and Means done. Energy and Commerce (as of this writing Friday evening) is still plugging away. David will provide more details on all fo the amendments that happened along the way.
On Wedneday, the Senate HELP Committee passed its bill:
"Even though it wasn't a bipartisan vote, it was a bipartisan effort," said Dodd. "There were numerous contributions made, not just technical amendments, that our Republican friends were able to add to the bill. And they made it a better bill. That's the way it's supposed to be and I regret they didn't feel it was significant enough to support our effort this time around."
But he was going forward without them, he insisted. "I still believe, as my colleagues do as well, that we can achieve that bipartisanship, but the important issue is a good bill. Getting a bipartisan bill that doesn't do anything for the people out there who are depending upon it, is not going to be warmly received. A good bill that is bipartisan obviously has a chance of not only succeeding but also being sustained, so there's a value in achieving that bipartisanship," he said.
But not at the expense of a good bill. "I will not sacrifice a good bill for that. That's not the goal here," Dodd said.
The news highlight of Wednesday was the Bloomberg story reporting that Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod were on the same page with bipartisanship, and that that page fit in very well with Senator Dodd's--getting some ideas from Republicans along the way was adequate. The final reform didn't have to rely on Republican votes to be considered "bipartisan."
Thursday, Daily Kos broke the news that the Congressional Progressive Caucus's internal whip list showed 50 members who were committed to opposing any legislation that does not meet their stringest criteria for a public option. In a follow up story at HuffPo, Ryan Grim got confirmation of the list, and the news that it was slightly out of date, and that there were even a few more members who had signed on.
On Thursday, we also saw the AP doubling down on its highly irresponsible "journalism," in which they let loose with a figure, pulled out of some anonymous staffer's ass, for the House bill's cost. Hilarity ensued, if you can call every conservative pundit then spreading AP's cost estimate lie across the airwaves hilarity.
Organizing for America announced its 50 states grassroots campaign for healthcare reform on Thursday, "to build support — person-by-person and block-by-block — for passing a plan this year that lowers costs, guarantees choice, including the choice of a public option, and ensures all Americans have access to quality, affordable care." In return, the RNC released a very scary Web site, with a picture of a glowering Obama up at the top.
Late Thursday came the bad news, and worse reporting, from CBO director Elmendorf. Bottom line, this is going to be an expensive program, but reporting on the potential costs--without the complete picture of the legislation on hand--was a mistake. Until the Senate Finance Committee completes its work, and the House amendments are all shuffled through and calculated, CBO estimates are just estimates.
Nonetheless, the news from Elmendorf made for extremely jittery nerves for everyone on the debate. Against the backdrop of the high cost of this reform (which, btw, at something over $1 trillion is STILL only going to cost half as much as the Iraq debacle) more bad news came in the form of the Senate Gang of Six and their efforts to slow the train down a little.
Which led to President Obama's hastily called press conference in which he reiterated the urgent need for reform--this year.
"Let me repeat: Health insurance reform cannot add to our deficit over the next decade and I mean it," Obama said.
He used a sports metaphor to make case for action this year.
"I realize that the last few miles of any race are the hardest run but I have to say now is not the time to slow down and now is certainly not the time to lose heart. Make no mistake if we step back from this challenge -- at this moment -- we are consigning our children to a future of skyrocketing premiums and crushing deficits. There's no argument about that."
He added: "We're going to have to get this done. If we don't get health care reform done now, then no one's health insurance is going to be secure because you are going to continue to see premiums going up."
"That's why those who are betting against this happening this year are badly mistaken. We are going to get this done. We will reform health care. It will happen this year."
Another quiet week, unfortunately ending on a downswing, with cost concerns at the fore, and the White House scheduling another primetime press conference for Wednesday. The important thing to keep in mind, quoting DemFromCT, "Presidents, in the end, tend to get what they want."