[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
National News See other National News Articles Title: WSJ: Obama Retreats on Health Wall Street journal Article * JANUARY 21, 2010 Obama Retreats on Health President Tries to Salvage Overhaul's 'Core Elements' Amid Capitol Hill Chaos By JANET ADAMY And LAURA MECKLER WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama suggested he's open to Congress passing a scaled-back health-care bill, potentially sacrificing much of his signature policy initiative as chaos engulfed Capitol Hill Wednesday. Top Democrats said they would press ahead despite growing doubts among rank-and-file members that they can pass a bill they've been laboring over for nearly a year. A host of ideas offered in recent days have lost favor. One day after losing their filibuster-proof Senate majority in a Massachusetts special election, exhausted Senate Democrats looked downtrodden as they filed into their weekly lunch in a second-floor room at the Capitol. "People are hysterical right now," said one Senate aide. Party members clashed over what to do next. Sen. Max Baucus, a top Senate Democrat, appeared to throw cold water on a bill that would focus only on stiffer insurance regulations. Rep. Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, scotched another idea, a complicated parliamentary maneuver to usher a bill quickly to the president's desk. In an interview with ABC News, President Obama said he would be open to scaling back the legislation in order to salvage it. "I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements in the package that people agree on," Mr. Obama said. White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said later the president would prefer Congress to pass the comprehensive package, and hasn't given up on that option. A pared-down bill could still restrict insurance companies from denying care and overcharging customers, but would likely jettison a mandate requiring everyone buy insurance. That provision opened Democrats to charges that they were unreasonably expanding the scope of government. Without such a mandate, government would no longer need to raise as much money to subsidize the uninsured and expand Medicaid, and so wouldn't have to significantly raise taxes. A smaller bill could offer a more modest expansion of insurance coverage, help for small business to buy policies, and new cost controls, among other things. Insurance companies, however, argue that without a mandate that everyone buy insurance, premiums would likely rise. Democrats cautioned they were far from settling on the scope of the smaller package. The Democrats' top leadership in Congress wouldn't say where the bill would head next. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said lawmakers would heed the message voters sent in the Massachusetts election, "but we will move forward." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said: "We're not going to rush into anything." A senior White House official said Ms. Pelosi was in the midst of counting votes to see if she could move the more comprehensive package through the House. Several Democrats said Mr. Obama's suggestion of paring the bill was a top option, and perhaps the only one. Winning Republican support for even a modified version also seemed unlikely. "You can't drive a policy that doesn't have the support of the American people," said Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe, the Republican who had shown the most openness to passing the bill during last year's health negotiations. Republicans said the election results were a clear order to stop the health bill and start over. Asked whether he thought the bill was dead, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said: "I sure hope so." Democrats hoping to salvage the initiative argued it was in the party's political interests to pass a bill, given that lawmakers are already on record as having voted for the expansive version of the legislation. They will be attacked on the campaign trail for that vote either way, the reasoning goes, and need something to show for it. Republican Scott Brown won in Massachusetts partly by presenting himself as the 41st vote that could thwart the health-care bill. Mr. Obama warned Democrats not to "jam" through a health bill before the Senate seats Mr. Brown, whose surprise victory in Tuesday's special election deprives Democrats of their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, making it easier for the minority Republicans to block legislation. In addition, some Democrats in the Senate, especially conservative members and those up for re-election later this year, could get cold feet about backing the bill after the Massachusetts result. "The people of Massachusetts spoke. He's got to be part of that process," Mr. Obama said of Mr. Brown. Senate Democrats vowed they wouldn't act before their newest member is sworn in. Democrats openly disagreed Wednesday about what to do next. Mr. Baucus, Senate Finance Committee Chairman, said he doesn't envision simply passing a bill based on changing the insurance market. "I don't think that's what we'll do," said Mr. Baucus, a key architect of the Senate's bill. "We want to pass health reform." Top House Democrats were weighing a handful of options. In one plan, instead of having the House pass the Senate bill and later modify it, the House would pass the Senate bill and the modifications at about the same time. The changes could later be passed through the Senate using a parliamentary procedure called reconciliation, since it requires fewer votes. Other options include using the reconciliation procedure to enact parts of the bill, including subsidies for the uninsured, or moving a stand-alone bill that enacts insurance reforms. The latter measure is difficult, though, since it would require 60 votes in the Senate, a Democratic leadership aide said. The Senate's version has key provisions House Democrats oppose, including a tax on high-end insurance plans, smaller subsidies to help lower earners buy insurance and a greater emphasis on state regulation of insurers instead of federal oversight. Any of the alternatives would require Congress to sink more time into a health bill at a time when the White House wants to focus on creating jobs and improving the economy. During the ABC interview, Mr. Obama listed the current bill's popular features, leaving out the central feature: covering as many as possible of the 47 million uninsured Americans. That's what costs money—about $1 trillion over a decade, and that's what Democrats have been working towards for decades. Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A1 Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||