NEWS & POLITICS  
comments_image -

Health-Care Deal Almost Sealed, But Will A Special Election Nix It?

The unions got a deal yesterday that protects their members' high-cost health-care plans. But will a Senate race in Massachusetts kill that -- and all of health-care reform?
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest News & Politics headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

Here is where things currently stand on the health care endgame:

  1. Breakthrough on excise tax.  Labor and the White house appear to have reached a deal on the excise tax.  Some details:
    Under the outline currently being discussed, which the sources stressed is still fluid, the threshold for the tax on insurance plans would be raised above what passed the Senate - which was a tax on insurance plans costing $23,000 and up for families.

    In addition, health care policies for state and local workers and health care policies negotiated by labor unions would not be subject to the excise tax until 2017.

    The sources also say a working idea is to remove dental and vision plans from the calculation.

    One of the sources familiar with negotiations said that in addition to protecting health plans negotiated under collective bargain agreements, labor leaders are pushing to expand the deal to exempt health plans for all Americans making under $200,000 a year.

  2. Regulatory reform.  Reportedly, the White House is backing the House of Representatives on including a national exchange instead of a state by state exchange, and on repealing the anti-trust exemption for the health care industry.  However, those discussions remain in flux, and deal has been reached yet.  No guarantee either way, right now.
  3. Reproductive rights?  No word on whether the final bill will contain the Stupak amendment (which would create a national ban on abortion procedures in insurance), or Ben Nelson's state opt-out language.  Pro-choice House members have been pushing for Nelson's language.
  4. Subsidies. The level of subsidies will be somewhere between the House and Senate bills.  Higher than the Senate ($871 billion in subsidies), but lower than the House ($1,052 billion in subsidies). Estimated at around $930 to $950 billion.
  5. Overall deal now imminent--Friday or Saturday. The excise tax was one of the largest remaining obstacles to a final deal between the House and the Senate.  The timeline for such a deal appears to be either tomorrow or Saturday, at which time the bill would be sent to the CBO for review.
  6. Timeline. The House will likely send a bill to the CBO on Friday or Saturday.  The CBO will reportedly take between 10 to 13 days to return a score on the bill.  From that point, it will take the House between one day and three days to pass the bill, and the Senate another three days.  All told, this means the final bill will be passed by the Senate as late as early as January 29th, and as late as February 4th.  The State of the Union address is on February 2nd.
  7. Coakley loss blows whole thing up--or does it?. With the Massachusetts Senate election on January 19th, and the Senate voting on the bill on January 29th at the earliest, it seems entirely possible that a victory by Republican Scott Brown would sink the whole deal...

 

...or would it?  As David Waldman writes, the Massachusetts special election would not be certified until February 20th, and Senate rules require certification to swear in a new member.  Republicans delayed Al Franken from taking his Senate seat for six months because of this, and Democrats could simply do the same to Republicans in order to pass the bill.

Also, as noted by multiple people in the comments, the House could theoretically just pass the bill that the Senate already passed, verbatim, and send that to the President.  That is one possibility, but I doubt the House has the votes for the Senate bill.  Some Progressives could be lost, and some conservative Dems would be scared off by a by a Brown win.  Republican Joseph Cao would probably be lost, too.  Stupak, and some of his acolytes, might also vote against it.  All in all, with only a three-vote margin, the Senate bill might not be able to pass the House.

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest News & Politics headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
AlterNet Radio: What's At Stake in Wisconsin; Real "Defense" Budget Is $1 Trillion; the Right's Phony Race War

By Staff | AlterNet

 
 
Fox, Breitbart, and Ricketts Try to Bring Back D'Souza's Pseudo-Birtherism

By Steve M | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Activists Speak Out Against Lack of Access to Bradley Manning

By Agence France Presse

 
 
NYPD Catches Sexual Assailant, Then Lets Him Go Free Because He Didn't Feel Like Being Questioned

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Gov. Scott Orders Purging of Florida’s Voter Rolls - Just in Time For Prez Election

By Adele Stan | AlterNet

 
 
Abortion Clinics Across Country Put On Alert In Wake of Georgia Clinic Arson Cases

By Robin Marty | RH Reality Check

 
 
Former GOP Congresswoman Blasts New GOP Women’s Caucus: ‘They’re Not Voting In Best Interest Of All Women’

By Josh Israel | ThinkProgress

 
 
Debbie Wasserman Schulz is Wrong on Wisconsin

By LaFeminista | DailyKos

 
 
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]