| The answer is no on H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Rep. Artur Davis (D, AL-07) says “I will vote no on the House legislation and continue to root for a final bill in December that can fix the holes in our health care system” He released the following statement today regarding his position on H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act: I am a supporter of health care reform who believes that the House leadership’s approach is not the best we can do. Because we risk a disaster if we get this wrong, I will vote no on the House legislation and continue to root for a final bill that fixes the holes in our health care system and contains soaring costs in both the private and public sectors. While the Senate Finance Committee bill needs work, there are three reasons it comes closer to achieving the real reform we need. First, the Senate bill tries to roll back some of the aggressive government subsidization of the private health care industry, a trend that has made that industry much too bloated and inefficient. The Senate bill would take the savings and use them to pay for many of the reforms in the package. Second, while there is no ideal way to raise new revenues, the Senate’s proposed excise tax on insurance companies is the best of the imperfect options. It will help rein in the profit spiral in the insurance industry. Finally, while the Senate does not mandate that companies insure their workers, their bill would make companies share with the government the cost of subsidizing any of their workforce that is uninsured. In contrast, the House bill sets a mandate on businesses, but allows larger companies to walk away from it by paying a limited penalty: this will surely drive some companies to drop coverage they already provide. These are all factors that should make even my more liberal constituents cautious about the virtues of the House bill. By the way, its much discussed public option will actually cost more than most private insurance plans. It is also estimated by the Congressional Budget Office that fewer than 2% of Americans would end up in the public option.
You can read and study HR 3962 here. These links are useful if you need more specifics about the Senate bills: S1679: Affordable Health Choices Act
S1796: America's Healthy Future Act The public option in the House bill is certainly not the robust public option we all hoped for, and it's true that we should be careful about pushing any bill just because it has something named "public option" in it -- it may also have some very bad provisions. I can't speak to the details of these bills -- if any of you can, please share. As food for thought, Darcy Burner has a good piece at Open Left on how this whole thing might play out for progressives. |
