Mark Begich open to reconciliation for health reform--that makes 50 without any maybes

[kpete]

Source: Open Left

Mark Begich open to reconciliation for health reform--that makes 50 without any maybes
by: Chris Bowers
Fri Mar 05, 2010 at 17:30

Senator Mark Begich is open to using reconciliation for health reform. From a letter to a constituent:




Thank you for contacting me regarding health care reform.

The reconciliation process is a budgetary tool used to address spending and deficit issues with a simple majority vote. The budget reconciliation process has been used 22 times by both parties since 1980. Action to clean up the health reform bill will further reduce the deficit.

Comprehensive health care reform has already passed the Senate with 60 votes. If the House passes the Senate bill, the President could sign that version of comprehensive reform into law. I believe reconciliation would only be used as a tool to take out special backroom deals and to eliminate concerns raised by many Alaskans I've talked with. The President has proposed narrow changes which I support, including completely closing the coverage gap for seniors' prescription drugs, eliminating the special Nebraska funding provision, providing additional federal financing to all states to help pay for the expansion of Medicaid, and strengthening the Medicare waste, fraud, and abuse provisions.

Again, thank you for contacting me. As the 111th Congress moves forward, please continue to be in touch with your thoughts and concerns.

Sincerely,
Mark Begich
U.S. Senator



That makes 50 Senators publicly open to using reconciliation to finish health reform without any maybes. There will be a reconciliation fix to the Senate health bill, as long as the House first passes one.

Read more: http://openleft.com/diary/17708/mark-begich-open-to-reconciliation-for-health-reformthat-makes-50

[activa8tr]

1. And Biden makes 51!!! Of course, I'd like to see 61 or more!

[FarLeftFist]

10. I think a Biden tie-breaker would be great

1- It's about time he stepped up his VP presence and 2- Dick Cheney broke a 50/50 senate tie 8 times. Let's see fox news spin that one, we would love to call hypocrisy.

[No Elephants]

2. Begich is saying he support s only the narrow changes proposed by the POTUS. Will that be enough

for the House?

[nyy1998]

4. It should be, most of the changes were a lot closer to the House bill

then the Senate. It'll make the HCR bill much stronger when it's "combined".

[customerserviceguy]

17. Why not have the reconciliation bill get passed by the Senate

before the House has to vote on the Senate's original bill?

That would separate those who are serious about undoing the damage the Senate bill would do from those who are just wishing and hoping the reconciliation bill will go their way.

[nyy1998]

20. It's a timing issue. I think the House wanted the Senate to pass the bill first

but apparently the Senate won't be able to do it in time, so Pelosi and Hoyer have conceded that they'll have to vote first.

[roguevalley]

23. I know the Begich boys personally and I could beat Mark's ass.

Truly.

[SlingBlade]

3. Hope so, But I've seen this before....

"HCR Reconciliation Thread (updated) WE HAVE 49 VOTES!!!!"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7773495

And how many of those votes are for real HCR and not just it's counterpart
The Corporate 70 billion dollar give away approved by the Senate and the W.H ?

This is gonna hurt, No matter what
So we might as well do the damned thing right the first time.

[SandWalker1984]

5. Why do they keep calling the Senate version health care reform?

It's real name should be the Corporate Health Insurance Profits Protection Act.

From what I've read about the bill, most of the reforms are token or can easily be gotten around by the insurance corporations.

The main objective of the bill is to force every American to buy the insurance corporations products, unless you are old enough to be enrolled in Medicare or poor enough to qualify for Medicaid.

Most Americans without health insurance now are going without because they cannot afford the premiums, for whatever reason. They do have to pay taxes, however, to fund both Medicare and Medicaid.

Yes, they put some subsidies in the plan to help those who cannot afford the premiums to purchase private insurance. The Senate version of the subsidies are lower than the House version and neither fully addresses the program of AFFORDABILITY. A change in the majority of either branch of Congress can lead to slashing of any subsidies to purchase insurance. What are you going to do if you are MANDATED to buy private insurance but canNot afford to purchase it, even with subsidies? Pay the fine and go without insurance? Be penalized? Go to jail? Those are your options under the Senate bill. You have no job guarantee in the bill to pay for your premiums. Remember what the Republicans did to the children's CHPS program? Slash and burn baby. IF they'd do it to children, they'd have no problems slashing your health insurance subsidies.


I work in real estate. The industry is suffering in many parts of the country at this time. Maybe we should lobby Congress to pass a law to require every American to purchase a home. That would eliminate the homeless problem, right? What about Detroit? They're hurting too. They'd like mandates to buy American autos, don't you think? Free market, my donkey.


The Senate bill is all about insurance companies getting more customers (ie victims), more control, more profits. It is not about health CARE reform.

It's not about care -- it's about profits and future campaign donations. Right, Rahm? Let's call it by it's real name -- ORAHMACARE.

[yurbud]

6. how many for the public option?

[Bette Noir]

9. Thirty-five, at last count.

[AlinPA]

12. Not enough. With only 35/58 this late in the process it looks very dim. nt

[SlingBlade]

19. Yep, 35 senators have spoken out so far...

So what's up with all these phony numbers and postings

Rahm must be a busy little son of a bitch

[Tx4obama]

11. Here's a link to the list

http://whipcongress.com/

[yurbud]

14. Harkin, Feingold, Rockefeller & Dorgan haven't signed on? I would expect them to be among the first.

maybe something is afoot behind the scenes.

[SandWalker1984]

7. Why are we tolerating this sham?

The insurance corporations never bailed out Wall Street -- it was we, ie the single payer American taxpayers.

It is not the private, military contractors that finance the exhorbitant Pentagon military budgets, nor is it the private insurance corporations -- it is us, ie the single payer American taxpayers.

If we, ie the single payer American taxpayers, are footing the bill, then we have the constitutional right to receive what we want, ie representation.

What a majority of Americans want is a true public option like Medicare for all. If the brain dead Neanderthals on the right want private corporate care, let them give up their Medicare and go buy insurance in the private market, while the rest of us get Medicare part E (for everyone) without parasitical profit driven insurance corporations getting between us and our health care affordability.


Now THAT would be real change we could believe in!

[rhett o rick]

8. We tolerate it because we really have no options.

Oh you can say "just vote em out". But those are just words. They have all the money and power. And if we did vote em out, there are more waiting to join the Congress-lobbyist gravy train.

I am not giving up and willing to fight even harder, but I really dont see much hope.

[nyy1998]

13. Or you could see how willing Republicans are at getting a single-payer bill through

Congress next year if they take over the House and Senate. This is the best bill that 59-60 seat majority in the Senate will allow. Is it perfect no(i would've loved a Public Option and some better subsidies, but alas), but it's overall a good bill that will bring cost down, cover more people, and bring down the deficit.

[yurbud]

15. I wouldn't want better subsidies for private insurance--better to cap their premiums and squeeze the

execs until they bleed money back into paying actual claims.

[rhett o rick]

18. I really dont like the "It's better than nothing" argument. Actually, I think if we accept this

bill, Congress will feel they are off the hook and will never look at it again.

With respect, to insinuate that we have a better chance of getting single payer thru a Democratic Congress is ridiculous. We have a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President and we have the American public clamoring for a PO, and no single payer and no PO.

Besides if the republicans get control in 2012, they will undo whatever we do.

[nyy1998]

22. Ok, but look at the Democratic coalition

when you have moderates and center-right guys like Liberman, Bayh, both Nelsons, Landreiu, Lincoln and Begich, the Democratic party being represented in the Senate isn't a liberal party. It's a big tent party filled with conservative, moderates, liberal Democrats(and almost everyone between). I think you're oversimplifying the politics of the Senate by thinking that because people represent the Democrat, doesn't necessarily make them a liberal Democrat. We're not the Republicans who've kicked out the moderates and remain very strongly conservative.


And no, the Republicans won't undo this bill. They screwed up on opposing Medicare/Medicaid, they'll be equally screwed if they touch this bill, especially once the benefits start rolling out. The old saying in Washington, "You touch it and you die" will apply to this bill.

I never said this was a great bill, but it's still a pretty good one.

[mvd]

16. Good news

Except we need to use reconciliation for the public option, and it sounds like he wants limited changes. If only our politicians would go against the insurance companies and support the POPULAR publc option.

[t0dd]

21. whoopee. we need 50 for a public option.

[Change Happens]

24. Can the WH Press ask Gibbs about this NOW? Looks like we are VERY VERY CLOSE!!!

Or something like this considered too much inside politics...etc.:sarcasm: