{"id":133,"date":"2009-10-14T04:40:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-14T12:40:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=133"},"modified":"2009-10-14T04:40:00","modified_gmt":"2009-10-14T12:40:00","slug":"editorial-barf-moves-ahead-%e2%80%93-now-what","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2009\/10\/14\/editorial-barf-moves-ahead-%e2%80%93-now-what\/","title":{"rendered":"Editorial: BARF Moves Ahead \u2013 Now What?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Tom070108-2\"<\/a> BARF (Baucus Against a Real Fix bill) passed the  Senate Finance Committee by a vote of 14 \u2013 9.  Most of the more progressive Senators voted for BARF, and I\u2019ve already heard some rumblings about that.  Let me be clear.  These Democrats have not betrayed their party.  Four other committees (three house, one senate) have already completed work on their versions of the bill.  Nothing further could be done to to further health care reform until the Senate Finance Committee produced a bill, any bill.  Senators like Jay Rockefeller and Ron Wyden do NOT support BARF.  They barfed for BARF only to get it out of committee, so the real work can begin on the Senate floor.<\/p>\n

Many were surprised by Olympia Snowe\u2019s Yea<\/em> vote.  She is already taking heat<\/a> from the GOP hard liners, or is she?  When I first learned about Snowe\u2019s vote, I commented, \u201cGood for her!\u201d  However, I have reconsidered my initial reaction.  Obama praised Snowe richly for her vote, but, for those who think I don\u2019t criticize him, Obama is wrong.  So far Democrats on the Finance Committee have wasted weeks courting Snowe.  To get that lone Republican vote, they have weakened the provisions of an already bad bill.  Had Snowe voted No<\/em>, the courtship would be over.  Even Snowe admitted that her vote does not guarantee further support for this bill.  So the courtship will continue.  I believe that her goal is twofold.  First, it provides her political cover in Maine, which is well left of their Senator.  Second, it continues the courtship, giving her further opportunities to weaken the final bill.  Earth to Senate Democrats!  Come in!!  I\u2019m shouting here!!!  ONE LONE REPUBLICAN VOTE DOES NOT MAKE A BILL BIPARTISAN!  <\/strong>I think the GOP hardliners know this quite well, and the believe that their complaints are an act to cover up an opportunity more obstruction and delay.<\/p>\n

This is all happening in the face of the withdrawal of the so-called support from the Insurance Lobby, AHIP.  In the coming video, you will learn that even the accountants from PWC who prepared the AHIP report I covered Sunday<\/a>, are now admitting that the report did not take into account any of the cost saving measures in the bill.  It amounts to blackmail.  If you pass health care reform, we\u2019ll raise your rates.  As I said in a comment here yesterday, this demonstrates, more than ever, the need for a strong Public Option, because BARF has nothing to prevent Big Insurance from making their threat a reality.<\/p>\n

At the same time, TPM reports that an insurance agent provided them with the link to secret talking point for insurance agents to oppose health care reform.  You can see them here<\/a>.  Since Big Insurance has clearly abandoned their seat at the table<\/em> to oppose health care reform, I see no reason to keep any of the provisions added to the various bills in order to pacify them.<\/p>\n

Unions are voicing<\/a> strong opposition to BARF, because most of them have negotiated away wage increases in favor of better health benefits.  BARF will clearly raise their premium costs, because it imposes a fee on \u201cCadillac\u201d policies that are worth over $8,000 a year.  That\u2019s hardly a Cadillac.  It sounds more like a high end Chevy.  BARF has the wrong people paying for reform.  The House bills all raise the necessary revenue by taxing the rich, the same people who have benefited from the Bush\/GOP tax cuts.  Isn\u2019t it time they gave a little of that windfall back?<\/p>\n

The Public Option has problems too.  The strongest version, from Jay Rockefeller, reimburses hospitals at Medicare rates for the first two years.  In many rural states, that reimbursement rate is lower than it is in more urban states, so low that the hospitals lose money on Medicare patients.  They make up for it by charging other patients a little more.  But a public option with Medicare rates would put many rural hospitals out of business.  This needs to be fixed in one of two ways.  The best is to adjust Medicare rates for rural hospitals to accurately reflect the cost of care.  If not, then don\u2019t tie the Public Option to Medicare rates.<\/p>\n

To get a good health care bill, we won\u2019t necessarily need sixty votes.  If all else fails, we still can fall back on reconciliation rules.  As much as the GOP whines about how disreputable that would be, that\u2019s exactly how they passed both of the Bush\/GOP tax cuts for the rich.  We can also pass a good bill with fifty votes, if Democrats will just stand together and vote for cloture<\/a>, to defeat the coming GOP filibuster, and allow a straight up or down vote.  In my opinion, any Democrats who votes against cloture should be stripped of their committee and sub-committee offices.<\/p>\n

I think I\u2019ve given you an explanation of where we stand in terms that are not too difficult to understand.  Just in case, here are two videos from one of my favorite people, Keith Olbermann.  The first is on the Snowe vote.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n