Al Franken Calls on the House to Pass Senate Health Care Bill

[flpoljunkie]

Franken calls for House to pass Senate health care bill

By Hayley Tsukayama
January 28, 2010

While Franken acknowledged there were some parts of the Senate bill he does not agree with, he said that called for the House to pass it, with the understanding that Congress would then "fix" the bill through the process of budget reconciliation which only needs a simple majority.

"We have to stop letting perfect be the enemy of the merely very good. And I believe that the bill we passed in the Senate is a very good foundation on which to build," he said. He highlighted several "very good" aspects of the Senate bill, including his medical-loss ratio provisions, which would require that 85 percent of premiums be spent on actual health care costs, not profits and overhead.

Franken acknowledged that the Democratic loss in the U.S Senate race in Massachusetts was a setback, but reiterated Obama's words in the State of the Union speech Wednesday night that this is not the time to give up.

"If they did anything, it helped remind us of why we're doing this in the first place. They reminded us of how hard it is, how truly hard it is, to bring about big change in America. And they reminded us of what we're up against. And they reminded us about how close we are to the biggest health care victory in half a century."

http://www.startribune.com/blogs/82950332.html?elr=KArks47cQiU17cQiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUzyaP37D_MDua_eyD5PcOiU

[rateyes]

1. If the House gets a fucking GUARANTEE that it will be fixed in that

the Senate passes the fixes BEFORE the House votes on the Senate bill, and sends those fixes along, then I agree.

If the house can't be assured of the fixes, then no.

[stevedeshazer]

4. Man, that's a lot of fixes.

But I follow ya.

:hi:

[rateyes]

24. Hi, STeve

:hi:

[Sherman A1]

2. I call for the Senate to pass the House Bill

I like Al, but it goes both ways.

[karynnj]

6. There are not 60 votes in the Senate to get it past a cloture vote

[Sherman A1]

15. I understand that, but the Senate bill does not have a public option

so while I understand the argument of "half a loaf is better than none", one wonders if this is little more than just a few bread crumbs for the masses and all the bread for the uber wealthy insurance industry. Might we be not better off, starting over?

[karynnj]

17. Short answer - no, we are not better starting over

There are more than bread crumbs there. There are major subsidies that will help many better afford it and it deals with pre-existing conditions and it helps small businesses get large group rates.

The Congress just spent a year on it. What reason would you give that starting over would reach a better end? It would be an election year and we now don't have 60 votes and the Republicans have spun the MA defeat in meaning more than it did.

Now, think of what the public option was supposed to do - mostly contain costs. If the plan passes and is implemented, when and if the need arises, it could be added via a stand alone bill (which will need 60 votes).

Half a loaf IS better if the alternative is getting nothing for decades.

[Sherman A1]

19. Short Answer.... I disagree and I don't see it as half a loaf, more like bread crumbs

[JoePhilly]

20. Pass nothing, and lose the House and the Senate.

[Sherman A1]

23. Didn't say pass nothing

I want HCR fixed so we don't get screwed by health insurance companies and big pharma and somehow Dems controlling the House & Senate hasn't been all that good for the working folks so far. One wonders how much it matters?

[dflprincess]

27. Pass this scam and lose the House and Senate when the public

figures out they'll be forced to pay premiums but still have deductibles and out of pockets that are so high, they still won't have access to care.

[quantass]

3. First Bernanke Confirmed..and now this? Aint gonna happen without a GUARANTEE! nt

[rufus dog]

5. Or we could take the Kucinich approach

and scrap it and go for Medicaid for all

One guy is trying to move forward

Another is a bought an paid for asshole who is looking for ways to help the status quo.

[DarthDem]

7. Uh, Franken Is Not . . .

. . . a "bought and paid for asshole," as you succinctly put it. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[rufus dog]

8. uh, you could read my post

and determine if Franken is the bought and paid for asshole, or could it be the other guy?

Here is a hint for you,... Franken ROCKS!

[DarthDem]

9. Ah, My Bad

I don't normally see much criticism of Kucinich as "bought and paid for" either, so I was confused. :) Sorry.

[rufus dog]

10. I held out on that opinion of him until I started watching his voting closely

and his agenda becomes very obvious, which is very dis-concerning.

[rudy23]

13. Not the only agenda that's become obvious. The DK bashing would also qualify.

Nice try, though.

[Sherman A1]

16. Skipping the rather rude editorial at the end of your comment

I do agree that DK is right.

[eridani]

11. Fix first! There isn't fix that could be applied later that can't be applied now n/t

[DFLforever]

12. They have to pass exactly as is.

They can't risk a return of 'fixed' bill to the Senate. Instead, the Senate will have to pass agreed upon 'fixes' separately via reconciliation.

[eridani]

14. Then it needs to go down. This bill is pure poison for Dems

--and also for real health care reform.

[CTyankee]

18. Franken and Sanders seem to be saying to progressives that they trust the

"fixes" will be done and so the senate bill should be agreed to by the house. I am sure they have some very good reasons to believe this. I have hated the senate bill but I must say that if two senators that I really believe in say it is going to happen, then I would go along with it.

Franken and Sanders are VERY smart. The last thing they want to do is go out on a limb that is going to be sawed off. At a certain point, it comes down to who do you believe?

It's not what I wanted but if both of them think it is a good starting point then I want to support them...

[harun]

22. Yah if Franken and Sanders are saying it, I am ok with it.

They have what we call "street cred".

And that isn't sarcasm.

[harkadog]

25. Unfortunately Franken and Sanders have no 'street cred'.

Franken has been in the Senate a few months and has no influence in determining what the Senate does. Sanders may caucus with the Democrats but he is not a Democrat and can't speak for them.

[dflprincess]

28. And Franken was never a supporter of single payer

and was luke warm on any public option. His preference has been to let the states find their own solutions to the mess, including their own single payer plans. The House bill does not allow it and there have been mixed opinions about whether or not the Senate bill does.

He's been good in some areas, but his position on health care has never been very progressive.

[Milo_Bloom]

21. Without a public option, the bill is worse than doing nothing.

[quiller4]

26. I strongly disagree--ending gender discrimination and pre-existing

conditions is not "worse than doing nothing". neither is substantially increasing Medicaid coverage. I am not saying I wouldn't like more but I'd gladly take the Senate bill with or without fixes.

[dflprincess]

29. All the pre-existing condition clause does is tell the insurance companies

they have to offer a policy - they can make the price so prohibitive that the only thing a person will be able (or "mandated") to buy will catastrophic coverage - meaning they still won't get the routine care they need.

Raising the income limit for Medicaid to 1.5x the poverty level won't help a whole lot if state rules about other assets still apply (like not having a care worth more than $1500). All it does is show how badly out of touch Congress is with what it costs to live. 1.5x the poverty level for a single person is an annual income of about $16,230 - that level applies regardless of where you live in the country. And, the states, who can't afford it, will have to find the money to cover the extra Medicaid recepients which may very well result in limiting the care they can provide.

The whole bill is nothing but a massive transfer of wealth, both public and private, to an industry that will collapse if it's not handed millions of new victims to fleece.