The Republicans have rejected it and a key Democrat on the Finance Commitee has rejected it. Sen. Jay Rockefeller will not support the Baucus bill as written. Here's Jonathon Cohn:
Senator Jay Rockefeller, speaking Tuesday afternoon on a conference call co-sponsored with the Campaign for America's Future:
I have sat besides Max Baucus for 22 years on the Finance Committee. ... I'm probably one of his best friend among Democrats. But I cannot agree with him on this bill. ... There is no way in present form I will vote for it. Therefore, I will not vote for it unless it changes during the amendment process by vast amounts.
Rockefeller cited four main concerns: The lack of a public insurance option, changes to Medicaid, changes to the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and overall affordability provisions. He did caution that he reserved the right to change judgments once the final bill comes out, although it's unlikely that bill will look much different than what Baucus has already released.
Later in the call, Rockefeller suggested four to six Demorats on the Finance Committee had similar feelings, although he didn't say (and may not know) whether they feel as strongly as he does.
Two of those possible Dems, Wyden and Kerry have already expressed their concerns with the bill, though not in as specific detail as Rockefeller. The other Rockefeller has in mind would likely include Schumer and Cantwell. It's a safe bet that Schumer feels as strongly about this bill as Rockefeller. The question is whether they can take a page from House Progressives and band together to either signficantly change Baucus's bill, or to kill it.
Cohn:
What happens next? The big question is whether other Democrats on Finance side with Rockefeller and whether, together, they can win changes to the bill that won't alienate more more conservative members. Would a bill with greater subsidies, insurance protections, and, say, a trigger be enough to satisfy Rockefeller? If so, would it be too much for Republican Olympia Snowe--or Democrat Kent Conrad?
Kent Conrad might just have to lump it and make the tough decision as to whether to side with the Republicans or his own party. Conrad, who thinks making concessions to Republicans is just peachy, has the potential to be a major problem for Democrats moving forward, if--as is looking more and more likely--they have to go the reconciliation route. Will Conrad, in his position as Budget Committee Chair, try to monkeywrench Democratic reform?