By: Health Insurance
Submitted: 2009-12-24 19:07:30 | Word Count: 685
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled yesterday that she is willing to live without a federal insurance option, saying the final health-care reform package will still make "a very big difference in the lives of the American people."
"Understand that whatever we pass, it will be great in its significance and the impact it will have," Pelosi told reporters who regularly cover Capitol Hill.
[ advertisement ]
Pelosi's remarks came the same day that Families USA, a Washington organization that champions insurance coverage for all Americans, asserted that the Senate bill would allow 886,000 Ohioans to get health coverage by 2019. Without Congress passing a health bill, 229,000 Ohioans would lose their coverage by 2019, the organization said.
Pelosi, D-Calif., who campaigned aggressively for a federal plan in any health-reform bill, appeared to be preparing House Democratic liberals for the likelihood that a public option simply cannot pass the Senate.Although earlier this fall the House approved a health-reform bill with a strong public option, the federal plan has been dropped from the Senate version because of opposition from all 40 Republicans and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.
Some liberals, including former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, already have chastised President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats for caving in on giving some Americans the option of being covered by a government health-insurance plan that would compete with private plans.
But Pelosi said, "When we have a bill and the discussion is no longer . . . about the public option," then Americans will have the chance to see "all the really great things" in both the House and Senate versions.
She said both bills would make private insurance more affordable for middle-income people without coverage. And she pointed out that both include "insurance reform that is very substantial," such as prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage to people because of pre-existing health conditions.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, assailed Pelosi's comments, saying that the public option "is only one of the problems with this legislation. It's also littered with job-threatening tax increases, unfunded mandates on states, Medicare cuts for seniors, and policies that will drive up health-care costs for millions of Americans."
Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, told reporters in a conference call that his organization had pressed for a public option, but "we did not think the public-plan option was such a significant tool in expanding coverage. While we regret the public-plan option is not in it, that shouldn't deter anyone from voting for this legislation."
In addition, Cathy Levine, co-chair of Ohio Consumers for Health Coverage, said in a statement that "while the Senate proposal is not perfect, it represents a significant step forward in improving access and affordability. For Ohioans who cannot afford coverage or are denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, the proposal is life-changing."
As the Senate continued to debate the bill yesterday afternoon, Sen. George V. Voinovich, R-Ohio, complained that it would add $25 billion in Medicaid costs to the states during the next decade.
Voinovich pointed out that the bill allows people with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level to enroll in Medicaid, compared with 100 percent now.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., has emerged as the lone known holdout among 60 Democrats and independents after Lieberman forced supporters of the bill to remove the proposed Medicare expansion.
The Nebraska lawmaker told reporters he was reviewing a proposal to toughen abortion restrictions in the legislation, a change he is seeking. Nelson said the compromise negotiated by anti-abortion Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., involves an attempt to separate private and public funds, an approach that in the past failed to sway the Nebraska moderate and Catholic bishops.
