Panel to view care options, U.S. Sen. Max Baucus says
BY CHRIS CASTEEL
Comments 
6
Published: October 20, 2009
WASHINGTON — One of the senators driving the health care debate expressed skepticism Monday that a public health care plan — the so-called public option — could get enough support to clear the full Senate.
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told reporters several options are being discussed, including a version that would let each state decide whether to allow for a public health plan to compete against private plans. "It’s new; it’s interesting,” Baucus said of the opt-in proposal for a public option. He said senators examining various proposals are trying to figure out what the unintended consequences might be of a federal public option plan that might be implemented in a patchwork fashion across the country. Baucus’ committee last week passed a version of health care reform legislation that doesn’t include a public option, and Baucus said Monday, "I just don’t know if there are 60 votes for the pure kind of public option.” Senate leaders are working with Baucus to meld his committee’s bill with one passed by another Senate committee. Though a simple majority in the Senate is 51 votes, Senate rules will force health care bill supporters to get 60 votes to beat back attempts by Republican opponents to block the legislation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is a strong supporter of a public option and pledged last week the House version of the bill will have one. She and other supporters of having a public health insurance plan say it’s the only way to keep insurance premiums from rising faster. In remarks to reporters Monday, Baucus echoed comments made by Pelosi last week in criticizing the health insurance industry for releasing a report warning the Senate bill would cause premium costs to rise faster. Baucus said the report was "so flawed it galvanized a lot of feelings in the Senate against the insurance industry.” Republican senators meanwhile continued to criticize Democratic plans, saying Monday they don’t do enough to discourage malpractice lawsuits and would add to the deficit. Baucus said he didn’t know when a final version would be ready for Senate consideration, though he said "it is important that we do move quickly.”
Related Topics:
U.S. Government, Health and Fitness, Medicine, Domestic Policy, Social Policy, Political Policy, Politics, U.S. Politics, U.S. Congressional News, Business, World Politics, Political Parties, Personal Finance, Health Care Policy, Health Care Issues, Insurance, Health Insurance, Health Care Reform
Prev
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).
Are our representatives that naive to think the insurance companies were operating on a level playing field?
Geez, sometimes I think we've got a bunch of idiots running this country.
The public majority has been saying they've wanted a public option, our so called representatives just have been not listening.
Lack of competition, stemming from their exemption of the 'anti-trust' laws, are an issue that have been way overlooked for the past 40 years.
Of course, all that money they've been getting from the insurance lobbies probably has nothing to do with their deafness.
At which point did I insult you? All I pointed out is that americans want a public option (http://www.pollster.com/blogs/us_health_care_gallup_101619.php) and tort reform doesn't work. Why do you have to be a dick? If you disagree with me say so in an intellectual way. Show me a poll, point out a specific part of the bill or my comment. Like grandma used to say, name calling is a sign of ignorance.
If congress doesn't read the bill its because they are not doing their jobs. It will be debated for weeks with of opportunities to read it and add amendments. The "Baucus Bill" is not going to be even close th the final bill. After it is merged with the Health committee bill, then voted on/amended by the senate, it will again be merged with the House bill. Obviously you do not have much knowledge of the congressional process (which is outlined in the constitution that you ironically refer to).
I disagree with several parts of the Baucus bill (see previous comment) but I do not see any "unconstitutional" parts of the bill (if you do, please point out specifically without name calling) and if there are, it will be brought before the Supreme Court. That is how the constitution outlines the workings of our government.
We finally have an administration with enough backbone to stand up to the health industry thieves and the GOP just wants to protect their thieving ways. Maybe that is why only 20% of the electorate identify themselves as republicans.