Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Health-Care Bill Clears Crucial Vote in Senate, 60 to 40
Senate Democrats won a milestone victory early Monday in the health-care debate, approving a procedural motion to move the reform legislation to final passage later this week, and without a single vote to spare.
US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid speaks during a news conference on December 10 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The White House urged lawmakers to pass contentious health care reform, saying that the watered-down version of a bill before the Senate still accomplishes the president's goals of changing the troubled system.(AFP/Getty Images/File/Alex Wong) The 60-40 tally, taken shortly after 1 a.m., followed 12 hours of acrimonious debate and required senators to trek to the Capitol in the aftermath of a snowstorm. The vote was the first of three procedural hurdles that Democrats must cross before a final vote on passage of the measure, now scheduled for Christmas Eve.
A challenging closing round of negotiations, culminating in a series of compromises with moderates, threatened to overshadow the significance of what Democrats believed they were close to achieving: the most significant health-care legislation since Medicare and Medicaid were created in 1965.
"This bill is the product of years of hard work, study and deliberation," said Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), one of the principal sponsors of the package, in remarks on the Senate floor before the vote. "These are the reforms for which Americans have been waiting."
Not a single Republican voted to advance the measure, including Sen. Olympia J. Snowe, the one GOP lawmaker who had backed an earlier version. The Maine moderate was lobbied heavily by President Obama, but announced Sunday night in a statement that she remained "concerned" about the measure, while objecting to "the artificial and arbitrary deadline of completing the bill before Christmas."
Though admittedly outflanked, Republicans declined to relent. In the hours before the cloture vote, GOP lawmakers took turns condemning the bill in impassioned speeches on the Senate floor. Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) called it a "historic mistake." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) accused Democrats of producing "a mess" that represented "a blind call to make history."
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who ran against Obama for president last year, vowed to "fight until the last vote," a threat that could keep senators at their desks until well into the night on Dec. 24.
Senators voted from their desks, a formality observed only for the most important bills. And despite the late hour, the Senate visitors gallery included numerous guests, including Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.); Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius; and senior White House aides Jim Messina and Nancy-Ann DeParle.
Obama and Democratic leaders, meanwhile, struggled to contain an uprising on the left. Responding to liberals, who have criticized Senate leaders as caving in on such issues as abortion coverage and the idea to create a government-run insurance plan, the White House and its allies acknowledged in newspaper op-ed pieces and on television talk shows that the $871 billion Senate legislation is not ideal.
But they argued that the measure would transform the health-care system, both for people who have insurance and for 31 million Americans who otherwise would go without.
"This is major reform," White House senior political adviser David Axelrod said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "It's not perfect. And over time, it may improve," he said.
Senate Democrats prepared for a final round of votes on Majority Leader Harry M. Reid's revised package before sending the measure to a House-Senate conference committee. After a grueling stretch of dealmaking, Reid (D-Nev.) announced this weekend that he had won the support of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), giving him the 60th vote needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.
With no parliamentary options remaining, McConnell held out hope that Democrats would stumble in delivering every caucus member to the Capitol at odd hours and after nearly two feet of snow had fallen on Washington.
"People have to show up, and people have to vote. At least three more times," he told reporters. Even if Democrats clear that hurdle, he said, the debate "is not over, by any stretch."
If the Senate approves a bill, negotiations with the House are expected to last into January. The gulf between the House and Senate versions has widened over the past three weeks, as Democratic moderates wary of excessive government involvement in the private sector forced Reid to abandon even the weakened version of the government-run insurance option he tried to add to the Senate package.
Last week, under pressure from Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), Reid also scrapped a proposed substitute for the public option that would have extended Medicare eligibility to uninsured people as young as 55. Last month, the House approved a $1 trillion package that includes a government-run insurance plan, and many House liberals want to keep the provision alive to apply competitive pressure to the private insurance industry.
For liberals, a public option came to represent a litmus test for effective reform, a sure way to guarantee that private insurers would face meaningful competition and eventually leading to lower premiums for everyone. But the ideal version of a government plan, one that would pay providers based on Medicare rates, proved a non-starter with many Democrats. And a modified version, with higher rates, was shown by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to hold little appeal, attracting just a few million beneficiaries.
Political reality was slow to take hold. Even in recent days, as the Senate bill broke free of its parliamentary logjam, high profile liberals such as former Democratic chairman Howard Dean, urged Democrats to shelve the Senate effort.
But as White House officials and other top Democrats pushed back, some proponents of the public option urged their allies to take a broader view. "It would be tempting, but it would be wrong" to reject the Senate bill, wrote Jacob S. Hacker, the Yale University professor who first conceived the public-option idea, in an article posted Sunday on the New Republic Web site.
"Since the first campaign for publicly guaranteed health insurance in the early twentieth century, opportunities for serious health reform have come only rarely and fleetingly," Hacker wrote. "If this opportunity passes, it will be very long before the chance arrives again."
Liberal Democratic senators vowed that where the legislation falls short, Congress would answer with modifications and additions. "This is not the end of health-care reform. It is the beginning," Senate health Chairman Tom Harkin (Iowa) said on the floor early Monday. Harkin, who is serving his fifth Senate term, described the procedural motion as "the defining vote of my career."
The House and Senate are at odds over numerous issues, such as how to pay for the initiative and how to bar federal funding for abortion under legislation that would offer insurance subsidies to those who lack affordable coverage through an employer. Nelson, an opponent of abortion, insisted on a provision that would require people who receive the new subsidies to write two checks each month, one for their share of the premium and the other specifically to pay for abortion coverage.
The compromise has infuriated both opponents and advocates of abortion rights. On Sunday, the leaders of the influential House abortion rights caucus, Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.), complained that it is "not only offensive to people who believe in choice, but it is also possibly unconstitutional." But other Democrats defended the compromise, urging their colleagues to focus on the broader benefits of the Senate bill.
"This shouldn't be the forum for the debate on abortion," Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."
Vice President Biden and Victoria Kennedy hit the same themes in op-ed pieces published Sunday, urging advocates of the public option to embrace consumer protections in the Senate bill. Even Dean told NBC's David Gregory that the bill is better now, despite "this last week of unseemly scrambling for votes," and that he would let the measure proceed to conference.
"While it is not perfect, the bill pending in the Senate today is not just good enough -- it is very good," Biden wrote in the New York Times. "I share the frustration of other progressives that the Senate bill does not include a public option," Biden wrote. But he added, "those in our own party who would scuttle this bill because of what it doesn't do seem not to appreciate the magnitude of what it has the potential to accomplish."

31 Comments so far
Show AllI would like to see a list of ALL the backroom deals that were made to recalcitrant senators like Nelson who got the federal government (all of us taxpayers)to permanently pay for Nebraska's increased Medicaid costs. I wonder if my state got anything.
One deal that Bloomberg reported yesterday was an agreement to postpone the taxes on insurance companies. It would have "forced insurers to take $6.7 billion OUT OF PROFIT, since they've already signed contracts setting rates for 2010."
In essence, the lobbyists successfully argued that it wouldn't be fair to tax the insurers before they had a chance to pass the costs along to their customers. I can imagine how the negotiating on future years goes when we're not paying attention.
From "Health Insurers Win Delay on Start of $70 Billion in Added Fees" by Alex Nussbaum.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=asyq1HrjE1LY&pos=2#
Remember Obama bragging how he had negotiated with the insurers and pharma? Pharma raised the price of prescriptions by more than the tax, and the insurers got it postponed and the rest still under negotiation. The Obama Party is really going to the mat for us.
NYT analysed the bill today and it is even more putred than you thought. Plenty of pork in it for Nebraska, Connecticut, and (surprise) Nevada.
"milestone victory"
"senators to trek to the Capitol in the aftermath of a snowstorm"
"A challenging closing round of negotiations"
"After a grueling stretch of dealmaking"
"White House officials and other top Democrats pushed back"
Such effort by the smiling puppets to produce.....
nothing....mandatory universal insurance company profits.
The singing and dancing continues.
Universal Heath Care is the only moral option.
I am confused, just what in the hell did the American people get with this healthcare bill? Our taxes should be used for our healthcare just like the other civilized countries do.
Saturday I heard President Obama say that NOW the American people can "afford" their healthcare insurance. Hello…. this is a human rights issue and there should be no INSURANCE involved. WE already have Medicare in place. I do not want to make the rich richer.
The congress has just set a small rock on the precipice of a cliff. When this pebble starts its journey down hill it will pick up speed and weight and the revolution will be on its way. The Democrats fuck up.
Not to mention, Congress and Obama's idea of "can afford" is definitely up to interpretation. So they can just keep slapping each other on the back and high-fiving it as they continue to screw the American people. If this bill was so darn good why has it been so deafeningly quiet from the corporate insurance ranks? Not one full-page ad, not one commercial have I seen. They must love this bill.
Health insurance stocks hit a 52-year high yesterday - no need to cause an uproar when you're raking it in over our dead bodies.
"Our taxes should be used for our healthcare just like the other civilized countries do."
That's oddly stated, as if the USA is civilized, which it clearly isn't.
"Our taxes should be used for our healthcare just like civilized countries do" (scratching out or erasing "the other", inbetween "like" and civilized).
I guess we all are wondering if our state got anything. No wonder we cannot function as a nation. We do not think of the greater good as a nation. We pit each other against each other as state against state. And even within states the battle goes on between rich and poor, young and old, men and women, gay and hetero, city and rural, and so called race.
The GOP and their ChristoFascists spent the entire time yelling about abortion and now that is just what we have, an abortion.
"This shouldn't be the forum for the debate on abortion," said Sen.Durbin.
Then why did the Democrats let the faith-based, taxpayer financed Conference of Catholic Bishops help with the legislation? Why did Obama continue Bush's faith-based campaign bribery system over the rights of women who have looked to the Democrats as champions of equal rights? How can it be Constitutional to let religion groups insert their opinions over the rights of law? Why don't THEY need a separate check written: one check for the taxes you want the CCB to legislate for you, and another one for government services that you don't?
Another article about the great victory, but no details about what exactly got passed.
I noticed the same thing. The uniformity of "our" press in failing to report news would make Pravda jealous. As others have done here, I assume it is an awful bill, because the insurance industrry did not oppose it.
Why, er, um, it's "the reforms for which Americans have been waiting." Baucus.
We sure don't need any more specifics than that. Sign me up!
We the People don't need to know the pesky details. All you need to know is that you should bend over and get ready to take in the ass.
Chains we can believe in!
Senator Sanders is a false socialist.
Berie SANDERS look at is record by far the best senator
Which ain't saying much!
Thanks dreamjoehill because I did not write that Sanders is the worst Senator among a sad flock but that his claim to be a socialist is a fraud. I have no reason to retract that conclusion.
This 'Health Care' (sic) bill reminds me of the illogic of the Vietnam war:
"It became necessary to destroy the bill in order to save it"
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
It's inconceivable that Democrats could find enough support from their own party line to get 60 votes. It's likely they paid a few bribes.
Democrats would have a hard time getting anything passed in the senate even if they numbered 99-1. They would come up with endless excuses as to why they couldn't get it done.
It's like the old saying - "The Republicans and Democrats were playing football against each other. A whistle blew at a nearby factory and the Republicans thought it was halftime and left the field. Three plays later the Democrats scored."
Democrats have the right idea but are too spineless and disorganized to get anything accomplished.
Republicans always do the wrong thing but at least get the wrong thing done.
Obama should do a Bushesque Signing Statement with this bill, stating simply "I interprete this bill as Single Payer"
Then watch the republicans have a collective shit.
Then watch the republicans have a collective shit.
You just nailed it. Kharma
Just to expand a bit ----
Let’s use the Health Care bill as an Obama “teaching moment” --- not him ‘teaching us’ but us ‘teaching him’!
This 'Health Care' (sic) bill reminds me of the illogic of the Vietnam War:
"It became necessary to destroy the bill in order to save it"
And, in fact, the reason that this illogic applied then in the Vietnam War "abroad", and now in the corporatist tyranny over health care "at home" is precisely the same reason --- that a ruling-elite corporate/financial/militarist EMPIRE makes all decisions, and not the people of America.
As Hannah Arendt presciently warned from her direct experience with empires:
"Empire abroad (always) entails tyranny at home".
Let’s teach Obama a critical lesson that he needs to understand. The famous old phrase was, “What goes around, comes around”. But today, “What goes around, comes home to roost” as his own minister tried to teach him.
Let’s tell Obama:
“If you are only going to pose as another front-man for the ruling-elite Global corporate/financial/militarist EMPIRE that controls our country --- by hiding behind the façade of its two-party ‘Vichy’ sham of democracy --- then that’s not the ‘hope’ and ‘change’ that we voted for.
We’ve been fed that old “Okie Doke” (as you called it) since the Vietnam War, for forty years!
Now if you really believe that times they are a changing, and that you don’t need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowin, and that ‘Yes we can’ confront Empire, then why don’t you give us a chance, and help lead us in a second American Revolution for democracy against Empire --- cause if you’re not going to lead, then at least ‘get out of the way’.”
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
I ALREADY HAVE government-mandated insurance with benefits controlled by a private insurance company. That company REFUSED to pay for my needed $20,000 orthopedic surgery. And, all the laws, regulations and rules could do nothing to rectify that.
It's called Workers Compensation insurance, and thousands of people with work-related injuries and illnesses are denied the benefits "provided" by it every week, all across the country. Workers' Compensation is a disaster for the people, but a gold mine for insurance companies and their contractors.
Imposing a health insurance system on all Americans that is modeled after this horror show is despicable. As long as benefits are controlled by private companies with a profit (or bonus) motive, those companies will lawyer, lobby, manipulate, deceive, threaten and use any and every tactic available to deny health care to their insureds, and maximize profits and bonuses.
"Workers' Compensation is a disaster for the people, but a gold mine for insurance companies and their contractors."
Absolutely! Workers' comp in very expensive - another reason why jobs are outsourced and American workers can't "compete." It would be another benefit and another savings in a Medicare for All system of universal coverage. I'd love to see a fair CBO markup on it.
Be careful. The "Workers' Comp is expensive" argument is frequently used by employers (who are mandated to buy it), and insurance companies, to push lawmakers into rewriting laws and regs so that fewer and fewer injured workers get benefits, and benefits are reduced for the rest.
Workers Compensation insurance premiums are expensive (to the extent that they are) because government mandates that employers buy the insurance, but places no caps or limits on the premiums. And, they are more expensive for employers who cost their insurance companies more in claims.
100 years ago, when Workers' Compensation laws first came into existence, one of the justifications for them was that employers would have an incentive to provide safer workplaces. But, after 100 years of lawyering, lobbying and manipulating, the possibility that benefits will be paid is so small, and the amounts are so small, that there is little incentive for employers to emphasize safety. (In fact, there is an overall disincentive.)
Even worse, employers are bullied into becoming accomplices of the insurance pirates in denying the claims of their injured and ill employees. If they don't, they are threatened, their rates will go up.
Again, this disaster of epic proportions is the model for what Obama and Dems would impose on health care for the entire nation, not just those with work-related injuries and illnesses.
Christmas for Unsurance Companies,
Compulsory charges for the uninsured,
Coffins for the ill.
Good old Health-Scare Bill!
Of course, members of both wings of the Republicrat Party will stand up in front of the corporate media cameras and slap each other on the back as they cheer the bill we laughingly refer to as health care reform.
The so-called progressives in The White House and Congress sold out single-payer immediately, then later a public option and expanded medicare. They sold out a woman's right to choose by not allowing public funds to pay for abortion. It's no surprise that this bill is what we get after Obama promised "change we can believe in" or was that "chains we can believe in."
Mark my words, by the time this travesty comes out of the conference committee they will sell out pre-existing conditions and caps on the amounts insurance companies must pay and anything else the insurance companies want.
Until the left wing in Amerikkka becomes as radicalized as the right wing, things will only get worse. Form One Big Union now!!
Better yet, form a Global People's Movement to confront this murderous Global EMPIRE!
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine