Health Care Reform bill passes
The US House of Representatives has narrowly voted to pass a landmark healthcare reform bill at the heart of President Barack Obama’s agenda. The bill passed by 219 votes to 212, with no Republican backing, after hours of fierce argument and debate. It extends coverage to 32 million more Americans, and marks the biggest change to the US healthcare system in decades. The Republicans say the measures are unaffordable and represent a government takeover of the health industry. Lawmakers held two votes into the late hours of Sunday – the first on procedural issues, and the second to pass a Senate version of a health reform bill.
Mr Obama is expected to sign the legislation into law shortly.
It isn’t what it could have been, what it should have been, no thanks to Republican obstructionism. But it’s a step in the right direction.
(Ironically, hilariously, the Republicans have promised to sue.)
What a terrific cap on the weekend!
A very disappointing cap to the weekend. I find it ironic that you followed a post titled “Stupidity on Parade” with one on healthcare. And, yes, I do see a relation there. The only thing about the vote that I am happy about is the no Republican votes.
But if there were no differences in opinion when it comes to politics, it would be a very boring subject.
So the whole rest of the industrialized world is wrong where they have universal health care, either through the state or by tightly regulated private markets. And the US is right where health insurance companies are immune from anti-trust legislation, and you can pay premiums for five years but they drop you if you get sick?
Fascinating.
Yes, it is quite disappointing that there is no public option.
It’s also disappointing (and almost hilarious) that the Republucan Party has not adhered to truth in advertising and renamed itself “The Ostrich Party”.
But we have some progress at last, and the President now has an historic accomplishment upon which to build.
Speaking of legal maneuvers (they’re going to sue?) how about we start prosecuting those who created the financial crisis. Fraud is a felony.
George, I did not say that no reform should have been made. This bill, however, is not an improvement – is the beginning of something I fear to be terrible. It’s been said before, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
No, but the Republicans did, quite explicitly. And when they had complete control, the only thing they did for health care was a giant giveaway to the drug companies (indeed, it was written by their lobbyists). Otherwise, they had nearly a decade in which to come up with ideas, and… didn’t.
During the last year, the Democrats – also known as the elected majority – gave them every possible chance to offer substantive ideas, but they didn’t. They dug in their heels to protect their corporate partners.
Calling it socialism, communism, fascism, etc. doesn’t make it so. And the CBO reckons that the bill will reduce the deficit, which is more than you can say for the prescription drug law that was passed under Republican control.
Look on the bright side: Rush Limbaugh promised to leave the country if this bill passes. You think he’ll make good on that promise?
A lot of what you reference has been argued in both directions by the opposing sides. I have heard Republicans say that reform is needed, just not this reform. I have heard Republicans recommend a number of health care reforms: tort reform, removing regulations that work against getting health care from outside the state, etc.
And Democrats argue that Republicans have offered nothing AND argued that the current bill includes many of the things Republicans HAVE offered. How’s that?
And, no I don’t suspect Rush Limbaugh will be leaving anytime soon. But he may. I heard a Democrats actually voted against the bill, so I guess anything is possible (pun intended).
Actually the bill, as passed, contains a lot of features that are right from the Republican side of the aisle. And it’s nearly a ringer for what Mitt Romney implemented in Massachusetts. But they’re still not happy, and they won’t be no matter what happens, until they’re back in power.
But no, the Republicans did not offer a plan. They never put together a plan and put it on the table. They did whine and stamp their feet a lot and talk about fascism and socialism and such, however. And in the hours following the vote, there have been Republican leaders talking about violence and secession.
McCain even came out and said they’ll now try to obstruct anything the Democrats do regardless of merit until the elections. I seem to remember his campaign slogan had been “America first” but maybe that’s old hat.
It saddens me because we need at least two sane parties in this country. The Republican party was once great. I very much doubt Eisenhower would recognize it now.
You implied that it was stupid to enact health care reform. Stupidity is to run counter to evidence, like maintaining against all evidence and science that cell phones cause cancer. Political disagreements are more likely a matter of power and conflicting interest, not stupidity.
An interesting POV by David Frum.
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
And yes, George, you are right on the money. The Republicans did nothing substantive in terms of coming to the table and offering alternatives. If they had, they could have gotten a bill much more to their liking, though not perfect. That’s called politics.
But (as Frum shows above,) they seem to be stuck with their attachment to hyper-ventilation and outrage not just as their key strategy, but as a platform. As long as they can “sell” outrage, they feel they can be viable, i.e. survive.
In other words, they are scared.
(Note to any who do not know David Frum: David Frum is very conservative and was George W. Bush’s principle speech writer. He coined the term “Axis of Evil”. IOW, he is not some liberal pundit dissing the Republicans. He is the son of the late Barbara Frum, who was one of the best interviwers ever to be on radio and television.)
I’ve made a point of predicting that nothing will get better thanks to this bill.
George, this is not universal health care. Equating this bill with universal health care is what David Engel said it is. Even by the CBO estimates, there will still be 24 million who aren’t in the system. I think that’s wildly optimistic, because everyone who is forced to buy the crap insurance the government is peddling with this bill will still, provided they aren’t independently wealthy, be unable to access the medical system. That’s the lesson of the Massachusetts system that you’ve been assuming is a good model. There, roughly 20 percent of the population still can’t afford to use the health care system. That’s an abject failure by any standard of universal health care, and yet people simply don’t notice this. At least, people outside of MA.
It’s proof that curing the inaccessibility of health care by making people buy insurance is like curing homelessness by making people buy houses. Twenty percent of the U.S. population is roughly 65 million people. Add all the newly “insured” to those who would be without by the CBO estimate, and you’re in the 40 million range already, so that seems like an achievable number.
There is also no means of enforcing the few pitiful insurance reforms in the bill. That’s by design – it was in the House version of the bill.
The only good I can see from this bill is that Medicaid is expanded, at least in some of the more regressive states. More progressive ones have already expanded Medicaid to similar levels. If you have any savings to speak of, or other assets that aren’t your house and car(s), you won’t qualify for Medicaid, though.
Oh, and in a few years, if your employer-provided health insurance is at all good, it will be a Cadillac plan, and subject to excise tax sometime past 2015 (forget exactly when, but that’s a lovely feature that will kick in eventually).
You’re right, it isn’t. My preference would be for single-payer, socialistic medicine with completely universal coverage, supported by taxes. But hopefully this is a step away from the unregulated, parasitic industry we have now and towards that direction. I very much doubt we can make all the necessary changes in one giant leap.
There are other countries in which individuals are forced to purchase private health insurance – Holland is one if I’m not mistaken – and it works fine over there. In a country with competent government. And a strong, socialistic infrastructure.
So maybe we are, as you suggest, screwed. But I take some comfort from the fact that the parasitic health insurance companies pulled out ALL the stops to lobby against this plan because it does regulate them more strongly. My only comment is they brought it on themselves.
Meanwhile the Republicans are acting like little 3-year-olds and refusing to let any business get done, even defense issues.
I think everyone knows that on this issue the Republicans were only interested in stopping something, not creating something. They had killed the Clinton initiative because they had “better ideas”. With 6 years of majority and 8 years in the White House, they enacted no significant health initiatives except a bill written by the pharma-lobby to gouge seniors needing medication, passed a 2 Trillion $ tax cut, began a war that will likely cost around 3 Trillion and presided over a further deregulated banking sector that perpetrated what may be the largest financial fraud in history.
In retrospect, since not a single Republican voted for this bill, I think Obama might have been able to get a public option in this bill.
What we DO have is a bill that will likely improve the situation for many, if for no other reason that denials for pre-existing conditions.
We can all speculate about whether this plan will or will not be an improvement. In the end, we will have to wait for the results. Lots of people predicted the end to “the American way” (as if that, whatever it is, is static,) when Social Security was passed, when civil rights was passed, when Medicare was passed. I suppose some could argue that those initiatives have ruined America.
If the plan encounters problems, then Congress and the Senate can sit down and work the problem.
Assuming we’re not still in screaming deadlock.
From a brief look at the Wikipedia entry on the Netherlands’ health care system, it doesn’t look anything like the system in the bill. Insurance providers are heavily regulated, and the government ensures that if the insurance companies have to pay out more than expected for their clients’ medical care that they are reimbursed sufficiently. “Private”, by the way, does not necessarily mean “for profit”. I haven’t found whether it’s true of The Netherlands, but other countries require that private insurers by non-profit. In the past, supporters of the health care bill have been less than scrupulous about mentioning this. That’s how most insurers used to be in the U.S., by the way.
What’s the difference? It’s the difference between a five percent margin and a thirty percent margin, at least in the U.S.
The insurance companies got exactly what they want. The problems that resulted from their unwise investments are now not such big problems, because they have another 15 million or more customers. They have what amounts to no regulatory framework to worry about. If you think they’re suffering thanks to this, then you aren’t paying enough attention, I think.
As for WeeDram’s point that we can all speculate, yes, we can all speculate. I can speculate that I’ll be five years younger and much better looking next year. Some speculation is rooted in reality, and other is not. The speculation that anything will change for the better for the people who are not the ones newly covered by Medicaid (in 2014) is not rooted in reality. I don’t care what some morons predicted about Social Security any more than I care what they predicted about the space program. Nothing that they needed to have fixed has been fixed. Let me just repeat for what seems like the millionth time – there is nothing in this bill that will make the insurance companies stop doing what they’ve been doing. Laws that aren’t enforced have no effect, and the laws about insurance company practices, inadequate as they are, will not be enforced.
Oh, BTW, have a pre-existing condition? Just try to get insurance. You won’t have any more chance of that in 2014 than you did last week.
You’ll have better luck getting them to pay for an abortion.
And no, Congress will not fix that. They deliberately left that undone, just as they left meaningful enforcement undone. They deliberately left drug reimportation undone. They deliberately left anti-trust status for insurance in place, as well as not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices. Without new management, that will not change. Passing this crap bill took them almost half the session, most of which was spent blocking or getting rid of anything that was useful for fixing health care. If this is the best they can do with a huge majority in both houses of Congress and the White House, they won’t do anything more with less.
At least, they won’t until people demand more. They’ve clearly solved that problem.
I might be thinking of a different country. Some time ago I read a comparison of several countries and how they handled health care, and got them mixed up.
You might be right, we’ll see. But if this was a giant giveaway to the insurance companies, they fought awfully hard against it.
I don’t see how this bill hurts health care agencies. While a child with a preexisting condition can be treated, what happens after the age of 26. This child will be an adult and the health care system can drop his coverage. Who will hire this child which turned into an adult, when they know their business’s health care coverage wont cover this young adult. What business will pay $2000 a year for hiring an adult when they seek government aid.
This is what this bill does.
I am not raising my voice with the Republicans, because they were lousy. Teddy Roosevelt suggested health care for U.S. citizens, so what have the Republicans done.
Personally, this civil war between our congressmen is getting disgusting.
I had my geography a bit mixed up, but here’s the Netherlands’ Ministry of Health description of their health insurance system.
There are two separate issues here:
1. The content of the bill.
2. The behaviour of Congress and the two major parties.
We should separate the two discussions.
Note: Captcha for this entry is “nation”.
I was thinking that the Republicans really need to realize there’s more to life than high school… because they’re acting like they’re still in it.
That aside, I’d be a lot happier if the bill hadn’t been jerked around six ways from Sunday. And I’d love to have seen a public option. I think it will happen eventually.
Meanwhile, we’re trading a requirement for everyone to get coverage with subsidies for coverage and regulations on companies. This will eventually prove unworkable and the government will start offering a public option as they did with the student loan situation (slipped into this exchange because reconciliation can only be used once in a year.)
You’d think we could step neatly across the stones and get to the other side high and dry. But our political process being what it is, we’ll have to slip on the algae and land in the water and almost drown before we reach the shore – hopefully the opposite shore from where we started. So I don’t know if process and content can really be separated.
You are right. That was a dualistic thought on my part.