Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Blue Dogs Delay, Water Down House Health Care Bill
Conservative Blue Dog Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee are celebrating their success in delaying a full floor vote on health care legislation past the August recess and in weakening two key provisions during their negotiations with committee Chairman Henry Waxman.
Congressman Mike Ross, L, (D-AL) speaks to reporters after he and a group of fellow Democratic Congressmen met with U.S. President Barack Obama about overhauling the healthcare system at the White House in Washington July 21, 2009. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque) "We have successfully pushed a floor vote to September," Mike Ross (D-Ark.) told reporters Wednesday afternoon. "The American people want us to slow down, and that's what we're doing here."
The Blue Dogs wrestled major concessions out of Waxman (D-Calif.), particularly related to a public health care option and employer mandates. The committee's current version of the public option now more closely resembles that of the health committee in the Senate, Ross proudly announced.
For instance, rather than linking the public option to the rates enjoyed by Medicare, the new language would require a separate agreement with significantly higher charges, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius would also have to sign off on any deal between the public option and service providers, while the plan would lack Medicare's bargaining power.
"The public option must go out and negotiate with providers, just like private health insurance companies do," Ross said. "It's strictly optional. It won't be mandated on anyone. It will not be based on Medicare rates."
Close to 86 percent of small businesses -- those with an annual payroll of $500,000 or less -- will be exempt from the mandate to provide employees with health insurance, according to the terms of the compromise. Those with an annual payroll between $500,000 and $750,000 must provide graduated partial assistance.
"That's as close as you can get to totally removing the mandate without removing it," Ross said. "Quite frankly, once you get up to three-quarter million a year in annual payroll, as a former small business owner myself, most of them are already providing health insurance, and if they're not, they should."
Under the original draft legislation, Ross said, barely one-fifth the number of businesses would have been exempted.
The Blue Dog negotiators -- Ross, Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), Baron Hill (D-Ind.) and Zack Space (D-Ohio) -- account for a majority of the seven swing Blue Dogs on the Energy and Commerce Committee, and their approval marks a big step toward passing the bill out of committee and onto the floor, where it will be reconciled with the two other health reform bills from the Ways and Means and Education and Labor committees.
Ross said he and the other committee Blue Dogs are determined to keep the cost of the final bill under $1 trillion over 10 years. He stumbled a bit, however, on the question of how many Americans he expects a weaker bill to cover.
"As many as when we went into these -- our objective has always been to make health insurance affordable for as many people as we can in this country," he said, but estimated another 10 steps between the current bill and the one that will reach President Obama's desk. "There's going to be a lot of changes between now and then."
Ross also credited representatives from the Obama administration -- including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Office of Health Reform head Nancy Ann DeParle -- with smoothing over negotiations with Waxman. For its part, the White House Press Office responded with a chipper statement released under Obama's name:
I want to thank the members of both the Senate and House of Representatives for continuing their work on health reform to provide more stability and security for Americans who have insurance, and quality, affordable coverage for those who don't. I'm especially grateful that so many members, including some Blue Dogs on the Energy and Commerce Committee, are working so hard to find common ground. Those efforts are extraordinarily constructive in strengthening this legislation and bringing down its cost.
House leadership likewise praised the committee Blue Dogs. "I think the way they've structured it is a good compromise," Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said. The offices of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) released a laudatory statement not far from Obama's:
We are pleased with the full participation of all our Members, who have reviewed the legislation and proposed significant changes. At this time, we want to particularly recognize the valued leadership of the Blue Dog Coalition to lower costs, to make the legislation work better for their constituents, and to assist small businesses. These are goals shared by all Members of the Caucus. At the request of the Blue Dog Coalition, in order to allow more time to carefully review the additional proposed legislative language, we will bring the bill to the House floor in September.
Meanwhile, some rank-and-file House Democrats have been grumbling that the conservative Blue Dogs are driving the debate. Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) said several members of the Energy and Commerce Committee complained during floor votes Wednesday afternoon that they hadn't been kept apprised of the changes to the bill before Waxman and the Blue Dogs reached an agreement.
The 83-member Congressional Progressive Caucus, to which Waxman belongs, has reacted with particular horror to the Blue Dog changes to the public option. Though there are not enough progressives on the Energy and Commerce Committee to overpower the Blue Dogs -- only five, aside from Waxman -- caucus co-chair Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) circulated a petition Wednesday afternoon to collect signatures in protest of the deal.
Still, progressive Democrats said they were optimistic that when it comes time to reconcile the three committee bills, the final product will be significantly more to their liking than the Energy and Commerce version. "At this point, I just want to make certain we have a public option and it's good and strong," Slaughter said.
And with that in mind, Democrats are now casting the bill's delay over August recess as a chance for necessary further negotiation and review.
"A lot of people view this as the end ... the conversations are ongoing," Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said. "Is there a Senate bill? You tell me. No? I rest my case. We've got a ways to go."

18 Comments so far
Show AllMy heart is bursting with civic pride!
It's a good thing I have health insurance!
Watching Congress enact No Insurer Left Behind legislation disguised as "Health Care Reform" is like watching ants fighting over a flake of styrofoam they've mistaken for a bread crumb.
· Yr Obd't Servant
You give Congress WAY too much credit.... Ants will only fight for a few seconds before becoming aware that styrofoam is not edible.... Congress can go on for a long time before smartening up.....
Also, ants can be put to work by placing "road kill" on the hill and in a few weeks you have a "cleaned to the bone" skeleton for Friday's "show and tell" at school... Did it as a kid.... Great for guessing the animal.... Congress is far less useful.
Thanks for the Ant Fun Facts!
Well, now that I've learned a thing or two, I suppose I owe the ants an apology.
· Yr Obd't Servant
It is high time for Americans to figure out a way to establish a citizen owned-and-operated health insurance company.....just like they do credit unions ! ! ! I am sick and tired of BEGGING OUR GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING ! ! ! The Board of Directors could consist of people who are absolutely trustworthy....Bill Moyers-types!!! We would all share the cost and have full coverage for basic healthcare.
Let's start a dialogue on this....IT IS POSSIBLE ! ! ! !
We don't need to keep wrestling with the LUNATIC FRINGE IN BOTH PARTIES WHO HAVE SOLD THEIR SOULS AND CARE NOTHING ABOUT THE NEEDS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ! ! !
Why are the majority of Democrats allowing a few rednecks from flyover states to dominate the healthcare debate? Where are the supposedly progressive voices in Congress? At this point, it looks like even the progressives are just going to roll over and vote for whatever Ross and Baucus dictate.
Ok, there are approx. 83 members of the Progressive caucus, and 52 members of the blue dogs. My math tells me that the Progressives should drive the debate, not the blue dogs. the Progressives need to withhold their votes if a substantial Public Option is not in the final draft of the bill. Obama, if he really gives a shit needs to lean on these blue dogs. If the House, where Hr676 was written, can't come across with a Public Option, how can we expect the Senate that is populated by the REALLY rich to have it in their version. Bernie Sanders wrote a pretty good bill, resembling Hr676, but it got no play.
Blue Dog says take one baby step. Take one giant step. Blue Dog did not say take one giant (actually also a baby step, but one of some importance) step!
Washington is too corrupt and the American People too stupid to force a good health care law. It's already over and it's just another lie. Why do you vote for these people?
Great question...
I say "Good for them".... when John Conyers (D - Mich.) can say in public that it is not 'useful' to actually READ the bill because it is 1,000 pages long, (to be fair, he QUESTIONED what use would it be to read the bill).... it's time to stop.... take a deep breath.... get out the reading glasses and see exactly is trying to be stuffed down our throats. There is a LOT there that even the dyed in the wool liberal would gag on.... or so I've read....
I have NOT read the entire proposal, and obviously neither have many of our elected officials... so perhaps it is good to slow down and have "our" representatives do the job correctly. From what I've read, a lot of insurance companies will make out financially while a lot of citizens will be stuck holding the bill.... sounds a lot like the banking bailout. (just my opinion)
Swell, more tax money for the plutocracy and more misery for the tax payer.
We might just as well go into exile and let these dogs pay off the national debt.
That's likely a good idea for people who can afford it.
Your party in action. Can I hear a "Go team"?
-TIA
Will this do any good toward getting everyone comprehensive, affordable health insurance, which is what Obama campaigned on ???
We will not know until after the next Presidential election.
This does not kick in until four years from now in 2013.
Taxes will kick in 2010 so we can start paying the "down payment" on Health Insurance we will not see until 2013.
See, we already have an improvement.
Currently I can only pay for my health insurance one month in advance.
Now we can all pay three years in advance of actually seeing any benefits.
Now that is change we can believe in !!!!
The debate is always centered on health insurance; which is what the media, congress, and a majority of well connected insiders in government are trying to ram down our throats. Why, because the people whom buy airtime on TV pay the media's bill, they fund congressmen and senators elections, and promise government employees lucrative contracts after their service.
What we need is a total overhaul of our health delivery system. Taking the profit out of it. Government backed elections. Why should a Senator from Montana be able to take money from a corporation, who is not a resident of that state, for what is basically a local election. Vote anyone who backs anything but nationalized healthcare out of office.
I admit to having been a poor physics student. How is it possible to water down water?
I have a solution. We authorize the CEOs of the 'health insurance' companies to steal anything they want from us, with two restrictions: no stealing twice from the same person in a calendar year, and no messing with the healthcare system. That way they get to satisfy their mania for larceny and to continue to live in the style to which we have accustomed them, and we are subjected to a more tolerable form of oppression.