Rahm Talks Up Plan To Delay Public Plan Option
WH Chief of Staff expresses openness to "trigger" compromise. WSJ: "'The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest,' he said in an interview. 'The goal is non-negotiable; the path is' negotiable ... On Monday, Mr. Emanuel said the trigger mechanism would also accomplish the White House's goals. Under this scenario, a public plan would kick in under certain circumstances when competition was judged to be lacking. Exactly what circumstances would trigger the option would have to be worked out."
House expected to tax wealthiest instead of taxing health benefits. Bloomberg: "Two people familiar with closed-door talks by committee Democrats said a House bill probably will include a surtax on incomes exceeding $250,000, as Congress seeks ways to pay for changes to a health-care system that accounts for almost 18 percent of the U.S. economy. By targeting wealthier Americans, a surtax may hold more appeal for House Democrats than a Senate proposal to tax some employer-provided health benefits."
CQ reports some unions may be flexible on taxing health benefits: "...the continued tax-free status of health benefits could become negotiable as unions weigh what they could get in exchange for accepting taxation of benefits. 'It’s about where we end up with a full package,' said JoAnn Volk, legislative representative for the AFL-CIO. 'This is just the beginning of the process. We don’t see any interest in this in the House. This is not where we make compromises.'"
NYT looks at the one successful co-op in America: "...state officials say Group Health’s impact on holding down costs has been mixed. And its successes may have less to do with its governance — by a board that is elected by patients — than with its ownership of a vast network of clinics and specialty care centers."
Change.org's Tim Foley mocks: "Health Co-Ops Yield Modest Improvements... After 60 Years or So"
Another deal with private health industry, this time with hospitals. W. Post: "The nation's hospitals agreed last night to contribute $155 billion over 10 years toward the cost of insuring the 47 million Americans without health coverage, according to two industry sources ... Most of the savings -- about $100 billion -- would come through lower-than-expected Medicare and Medicaid payments to hospitals, said the two industry sources. About $40 billion would be saved by slowly reducing what hospitals get to care for the uninsured, they added. The reductions would probably not begin for several years, after a significant number of people have enrolled in the new insurance programs. For their part, hospital officials have an understanding that, if the final legislation includes a new government-sponsored insurance program, it will not pay at Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement rates, which the industry has long argued do not cover the cost of services."
Analysis of the deals from Jonathan Cohn: "...reform should ideally include measures like strengthening the hand of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), developing more data on comparative effectiveness (CE), or building a strong public insurance plan. But hospitals don't like the idea of a stronger MedPAC, drug makers are pretty hostile to good CE, and insurers (among others) hate the idea of a public plan. When the industries cut these deals, are they prying promises from Baucus--or the White House--not to push too hard on these levers?"
The Walker Report analyzes Quinnipiac poll finding 62% support public plan option and 28% would choose it: "That is roughly 62 million Americans who want to sign up for an unknown and unproven public option right now ... Could you imagine that statistic for any other product. You think 28% of Americans would prefer to drink a government made soda, eat at a government run restaurant, or buy a government build DVD player? I doubt it. This shows just how little respect a segment of America has for private health insurance companies."
TPMDC's Brian Beutler questions Sen. Baucus' independence from insurance and drug industry: "...only a handful of senators have any real power over the direction reform will take--and of them, Max Baucus may have both the most clout and the greatest number of ties to industry. Take a quick glance at the website Open Secrets and you can find over a half dozen insurance and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists who were once Baucus staffers."
MSNBC's David Shuster grills public plan option skeptic Sen. Carper on his insurance and drug industry campaign contributions.
Senate Climate Hearings Today, Bill in August?
Cabinet officials come before Sen. enviro cmte at 10 AM ET. ClimateWire: "These are the first in a long line of Senate climate hearings as the Democratic-led chamber tries to cobble together a bill in time for Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) Sept. 18 deadline for all committees to clear their pieces of the legislation ... Boxer said she plans to build in large part off H.R. 2454, the bill the House passed last month, 219-212. A Democratic EPW Committee aide explained yesterday that Boxer wants to have legislative text ready for public release within the next two weeks, with the weeks of July 27-31 and Aug. 3-7 set aside for marking up the bill."
The Hill looks at the potential "centrist" obstructionists: "Anna Aurilio, a lobbyist for Environment America, a liberal group, ranked Nelson, Landrieu, Bayh, Lincoln and Pryor as the toughest Democrats to persuade to join Democratic leaders on environmental votes."
W. Post observes any attempts to weaken House bill could lose enviro support: "President Obama's climate-change legislation begins a daunting march through the Senate this week, with supporters acknowledging they are as many as 15 votes shy of victory and well aware that deals to attract more votes could erode the bill's environment-friendly objectives. Senators will weigh a slew of potential compromises -- everything from allowing more offshore drilling for oil and natural gas to increasing funding for nuclear energy -- that they think would inch the package closer to passage. But environmental activists warn that the 1,400-page House version of the bill already includes so many giveaways to corporate America that more horse-trading in the Senate could lead them to oppose the final version."
Second Stimulus Push
Obama econ adviser Laura Tyson embraces second stim. Bloomberg: "The U.S. should consider drafting a second stimulus package focusing on infrastructure projects because the $787 billion approved in February was 'a bit too small,' said Laura Tyson, an adviser to President Barack Obama. The current plan 'will have a positive effect, but the real economy is a sicker patient,' Tyson said in a speech in Singapore today. The package will have a more pronounced impact in the third and fourth quarters, she added, stressing that she was speaking for herself and not the administration."
The Hill reports on push from unions: "A group of unions, including the AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said they will start pressing lawmakers for a jobs bill. They said the $787 billion economic stimulus approved earlier this year, though helpful, wasn’t big enough and didn’t include enough government spending ... Lee, the AFL-CIO policy director, said that any new stimulus should include more infrastructure spending, unemployment insurance and relief for state and local governments, which are suffering budget crunches."
The Stash rounds up economist views on second stim.
Banks Planning "Harry and Louise" Ads To Kill Consumer Commission
The Stash breaks: "A knowledgeable industry source confirmed yesterday that, as part of their efforts to roll back the Obama proposal for a consumer financial products regulator, several lobbying organizations representing banks are developing a 'Harry and Louise'-style ad campaign, after the commercials that targeted the Clinton healthcare plan in the early '90s. The ads will emphasize the intrusiveness of the proposal--of the government 'telling you what you can and can't buy,' according to the source. The hope is to run them sometime in July, when House Financial Services chairman Barney Frank plans to move the measure through his committee."
W. Post adds: "These opponents of a new agency have begun visiting members of the House Financial Services Committee, which plans to take up the proposal in the coming weeks, and are putting a top priority on centrist Democrats, according to people familiar with the meetings. 'It's your basic shoe-leather lobbying,' said Bill Himpler, executive vice president for government affairs of the American Financial Services Association, the trade group for the consumer credit industry. 'This has become front burner -- the number-one issue of our association, at least for the foreseeable future.'"
