Mitch McConnell « Healthcare Horserace

Senate Defeats Dem Leader Reid’s ‘Doc Fix’ Plan

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

Roll Call is reporting that the $250 billion extension to the Medicare physician payment program was defeated in the Senate today. Reid couldn’t even get a simple majority losing in a 47 to 53 vote.

Naturally Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev) blames the Republicans. Reid complained that the loss was a result of “activities and actions by the Republican-dominated Washington.” Seriously. A “Republican dominated Washington”? Did Harry Reid miss the fact that the Democrats have majorities in both the House and the Senate as well as holding the White House? How could Washington be “Republican dominated” when the GOP has little capability to affect the debate through the power of majority control?

Roll Call pinpoints the most salient question here, though. If Reid can’t even get this one through with a Democrat majority how is he going to get the rest of Obamacare passed? The GOP, for its part, was ecstatic.

“In the Senate’s first vote on health care spending this year, a bipartisan majority rejected the Democrat leadership’s attempt to add another quarter trillion dollars to the national credit card without any plan to pay for it,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said after the tally. “With a record deficit and a ballooning national debt, the American people are saying enough is enough. Today’s vote shows that this message is finally starting to get through to Congress. Hopefully it’s a sign of things to come in the health care debate ahead.”

I have to say, for all the talk of wishy washy Republicans crossing the aisle and thumbing noses at their constituents, the GOP has been startling resolute in the face of Obamacare. With but one exception in the Senate (the left-leaning Olympia Snowe of Maine) the GOP has voted consistently against Obamacare. And this bill even saw Snowe siding with her GOP brethren against Reid for a change.

In the end, 12 Democrats and one Independent joined all 40 Republicans in voting against the bill. Among those in the Democratic Conference voting no were: Sens. Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Robert Byrd (W.Va.), Kent Conrad (N.D.), Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) Jon Tester (Mont.), Jim Webb (Va.), Mark Warner (Va.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Herb Kohl (Wis.), Russ Feingold (Wis.) Bill Nelson (Fla.), Evan Bayh (Ind.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.). The primary argument among opponents of the measure is that it should contain offsets.

If you are a Republican that is mad at your leadership — and you have a lot of reason to feel that way — this issue should warm your heart. The GOP has been stalwart in opposition to Obamacare thus far.

Tags: Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Senate
Posted in Miscellaneous, The Players | 2 Comments »

Republican Governors Condemn Baucuscare

Monday, October 12th, 2009

Likely anticipating skyrocketed state liabilities, 14 out of the 28 Republican governors in the U.S. have sent letters to their respective Congressional delegations urging them to vote against the health care reform proposals of Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT).

According to an article from The Hill, the efforts of these GOP governors have been complemented by the active assistance of Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Though Barbour coordinated the letter-writing effort among the governors, it is part of a larger initiative launched by House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) earlier this year to increase the outreach among state heads and congressional leaders. Sources say Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is also playing a leading role on this issue.

Those Republican doctors who have not committed to writing critical letters are: “Charlie Crist (Fla.), Jodi Rell (Conn.), Tim Pawlenty (Minn.), Bob Riley (Ala.), Bobby Jindal (La.), John Hoeven (N.D.) and Jim Douglas (Vt.). Of these, Crist, Douglas and Rell were strong proponents of the stimulus package that was rejected by all but three Republicans in Congress.”

The main concern regarding Baucus care is the unprecedented financial burden it will place in the form of liabilities of the states:

GOP Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman told his delegation, including Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), that that “this new unfunded federal Medicaid mandate could result in the higher taxes on Nebraskans or in cutting state aid to Nebraska’s school districts as well as state appropriations to our universities, state colleges and community colleges.”

Nelson, a centrist, has refused to commit to voting with Democrats on procedural roll calls on healthcare reform legislation. If Nelson sided with Republicans, he would significantly increase the chances of a successful GOP filibuster.

Other Republican governors, including Haley Barbour (Miss.), Mitch Daniels (Ind.) and Rick Perry (Texas), echoed Heineman in letters they have recently sent to Capitol Hill. Governors from Hawaii, Arizona, Alaska, California, Rhode Island, South Carolina and others plan to follow suit before week’s end.

Barbour, chairman of the Republican Governors Association (RGA), was the first to pen a “letter of concern” to lawmakers from his state. And it provided a template for others to follow.

While Democrats in the Senate claim that this program will be funded by the federal government and run by the states, many Republican governors are skeptical.

“The current proposals, both in the House and Senate, will expand the Medicaid program at additional costs paid not by the federal government, but passed down to the states,” Barbour wrote earlier this month.

Republicans are touting an editorial in Monday’s Wall Street Journal titled, “Max’s Mad Mandate.” The op-ed called Baucus’s bill “the mother — and father and crazy uncle — of unfunded mandates.”

GOP governors are not the only ones who have voiced their criticisms:

Democratic governors have raised concerns about the House healthcare bill, but some of them backtracked this summer. The Democratic governors, including Brian Schweitzer (Mont.) and Martin O’Malley (Md.), accused staff at the National Governors Association of giving them false information after a meeting with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, according to a FoxNews.com report.

Tags: Baucuscare, Ben Nelson, Bobby Jindal, Brian Schweitzer, Charlie Crist, Dave Heineman, Haley Barbour, Jim Douglas, Jodi Rell, John Boehner, John Hoeven, Kathleen Sebelius, Martin O'Malley, Max Baucus, Mitch Daniels, Mitch McConnell, Rick Perry, Tim Pawlenty
Posted in The Players | Start the Discussion

White House Switches Strategy, Touts “Republican Support”

Wednesday, October 7th, 2009

In yet another shift in strategy, the White House has abandoned their “tough luck” attitude about the GOP and instead, has begun to tout what they believe is Republican support for their health care reform agenda.

Previously, President Obama attempted to portray himself as a “bipartisan” kind of guy, longing to craft legislation that would satisfy both parties. Then, when realizing the height of the cards stacked against him, began to accuse conservatives of not having ideas of their own and reiterated that he would push his reforms with or without them.

Now, according to Reuters, the White House will claim that those who oppose his agenda are “isolated” from the rest of their party and the rest of the country.

The Obama administration has adopted a new tactic in its push for healthcare reform: touting the support of Republicans outside of Washington after failing to win any backing for overhaul plans in Congress from members of the party on Capitol Hill.

Seeking to portray opponents of the legislation as isolated from mainstream America and even from prominent members of the Republican Party, the White House on Tuesday distributed a statement from Arnold Schwarzenegger, California’s Republican governor, urging the passage of national healthcare reform.

President Obama substantiates his argument by rolling out the endorsement of former Wisconsin Republican governor Tommy Thompson.

On Monday, it sent out a statement by Tommy Thompson, a former Republican governor of Wisconsin and presidential candidate who was former President George W. Bush’s health secretary, endorsing a plan coming through the Senate Finance Committee.

“It (the plan) moves us down the path of providing affordable high-quality health care for all and expanding coverage for millions,” said Thompson’s statement, issued with Richard Gephardt, a former Democratic leader in Congress.

Republican leaders are not convinced, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) believing the so-called “bipartisan” support to be few and far between.

“The influx of headlines breathlessly claiming support for health care reform amongst Republicans is puzzling considering Republicans have been calling for reform for months,” said a statement from Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell’s office.

“It is the details of the health care reform proposals before Congress that are extremely concerning for Republicans,” McConnell’s statement said.

No Republicans in Congress currently back the Finance Committee proposal to overhaul the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, or any other put forward by Democrats. It is not clear whether any could muster the support even of all 60 Senate Democrats, which is needed to ensure passage.

Meanwhile, free market advocacy groups like Americans for Prosperity have not let up, engaging citizen activists to remain involved in the debate. During a protest held Friday at the U.S. Capitol, 2,000 participants voiced their concerns about the President’s health care reform plans and demanded patient-centered reforms.

Tags: Americans for Prosperity, Mitch McConnell, Richard Gephardt, Tommy Thompson, white house, Wisconsin
Posted in The Players | 1 Comment »

Sen. McConnell: Obama is stifling dissent on health care reform

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

This is the text of a speech given by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R- KY) on the floor of the Senate on Sept. 24, 2009.

“Yesterday afternoon I came to the floor to speak out against one of the tactics that supporters of the President’s health care proposal have resorted to in recent days.

“It appears that a particular senator has encouraged the administration to use its powers to clamp down on an opponent of the administration’s health care policy.

“What’s more, the administration snapped to attention at the senator’s request. It followed the senator’s advice, and almost immediately the government clamped down on a private health care company in my home state that had been sharing its concerns about the administration’s health care proposal with seniors on Medicare.

“Yesterday, we saw how legitimate those concerns were, when the director of the non-partisan independent Congressional Budget Office said that the administration’s proposed Medicare cuts would indeed lead to significant cuts in benefits to seniors. Let me repeat that.

“First and foremost, this episode should be of serious concern to millions of seniors on Medicare who deserve to know what the government has in mind for their health care. But it should also frighten anyone who cherishes their First Amendment right to free speech — whether in Louisville, Helena, San Francisco, or anywhere else.

“And it should concern anyone who’s already worried about a government takeover of health care. Why? Because it seems that in order to advance its goals, the administration and its allies are now attacking citizen groups and stifling free speech.

“Let’s review: at the instigation of the Chairman of the Finance Committee, the author of the health care legislation now working its way through Congress, the Executive Branch, through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has launched an investigation into Humana for explaining to seniors how this legislation might affect their coverage.

“One more time: a private health care provider told its elderly clients how health care legislation might affect their lives. And now the federal government is putting its full weight into investigating that company at the request of the senator who wrote the legislation in question.

“And we now find out that the concerns that this company was raising to its clients were perfectly legitimate, according to the director of the CBO.

“This is so clearly an outrage it’s hard to believe anyone thought it would go unnoticed. For explaining to seniors how legislation might affect them, the federal government has now issued a gag order on that company, and any other company that communicates with clients on the issue, telling them to shut up — or else.

“This is precisely the kind of thing Americans are worried about with the administration’s health care plan. They’re worried that handing government the reins over their health care will lead to just this kind of intimidation. They’re worried that government agencies which were created to enforce violations even-handedly will instead be used against those who voice a different point of view.

“That’s apparently what’s happening here, and to many Americans, it’s a preview of what’s in store for everyone under the administration’s health care plan.

“It’s hard to imagine any justification for this. But if the people behind this latest effort believe they have some legal justification for shutting up a private company, then they need to explain themselves to the American people. More specifically, they need to explain to 11 million seniors on Medicare Advantage why they shouldn’t be allowed to know how cuts to this program will affect their coverage.

“Yesterday my office called CMS to ask for the legal authority that would warrant them imposing an industry-wide gag order on an issue of public concern. We’re still waiting for a response. So this morning, I’m asking the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to provide my office with its justification for telling a company it can’t communicate with its seniors.

“Over the past several months, we’ve seen a pattern of intimidation by supporters of the administration’s health care proposal — including efforts to demonize serious-minded critics at town hall meetings across the country.

“Now we’re seeing something even worse: the full power of the federal government being brought to bear on businesses by the very people writing the legislation.

“This was troubling enough in itself. It’s even more troubling now that we’re told that Humana was exactly right in what it was telling clients. Americans were already skeptical about the administration’s plan. They should be even more skeptical now.”

(Posted at the Washington Examiner.)

Tags: Baucus, Mitch McConnell, Senate
Posted in The Players | Start the Discussion

Does anyone know exactly what GOP-care would look like?

Monday, September 21st, 2009

Over the past several months, Republicans have been blasted by the political left for being the ‘Party of No‘, for spreading disinformation, and for trying to kill health care reform when they should be trying to help President Obama fix the system. It is clear that most Americans believe the system needs reforming, but the nation remains split on whether President Obama and the Democrat Congress is on the right track to do so. This begs the question, exactly what would GOP-care look like if the Republicans were in control of Congress?

In an interview on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell was asked just how Republicans would define a “win” on health care reform.

Winning is stopping and starting over and getting it right. I don’t know anybody in my Republican conference in the Senate who’s in favor of doing nothing on health care.

Now, in fairness to the Republicans, it is hard to ask them to devote the time to crafting an alternative bill when they don’t have the votes to pass it, but they cannot simply campaign against Obamacare if they want to be seen as credible on health care reform and a credible alternative to lead the nation after the 2010 elections. In a post on The Daily Beast, Denis Calabrese - former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Dick Armey, lays out a game plan for Republicans in 2010. It’s no surprise that coming up with a proactive health care strategy is a key element of that plan.

Have Real Policy Alternatives: Obama is almost right about one thing: The GOP has not had a real alternative to socialized medicine on the table for many, many years. In fact the same can be said for a host of other issues. Independent voters always want to evaluate two different approaches. If they are judging between a flawed solution and no solution, people will tend to pick the flawed solution. Something beats nothing almost every time. The GOP must put as much effort behind selling their approach and contrasting it with Obama’s as they do trashing the president’s proposals, no matter how well-deserved.

So far, it has been admittedly difficult to tell where Republicans stand on health care reform - outside of wanting to defeat Democrat proposals for it - and just what a conservative reform bill might look like. House and Senate Republicans did put bills forward earlier this summer, but there was little cohesion between their offerings and the bills showed a clear division between conservatives on the issue.

Groups like the Heritage Foundation and conservative publications like The American Spectator backed the Patients’ Choice Act favored by Republican senator Tom Coburn and considered by critics on the political right to be an amalgamation of conservative and liberal ideas including health insurance exchanges and a watered-down public option. Center-right conservatives favored Republican Senator Jim DeMint’s Health Care Freedom Plan which called for the very conservative ideas of health care vouchers. Center-right leader Grover Norquist believes compromising with a Democrat party that wants government-run health care isn’t an option and went so far as to compare the Coburn bill to selective amputation in an interview with HealthCareHorseRace.com back in August.

Politicians are particularly prone to how about if we just cut off one finger and you should appreciate all my work to protect your second finger. If you’re going to run a campaign where you have to get popular support, we need to be the no fingers cut off leaders.

Getting one finger cut off is the prelude to them coming back for the other finger. That’s why the DeMint proposal – which is not a compromise but is a bold, conservative, free-market approach, is so helpful. The guys who say lets cut off one finger instead of two or three, think that’s the only alternative way to do it.

This week’s mark-up of Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus‘ America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009 promises to be entertaining political theater, but it also promises to show just how divided the Republicans continue to be on the issue of health care reform. Of the 564 amendments filed to the bill ahead of mark-up, those filed by Republicans show little in the way of a united front. Republican Orrin Hatch proposed 47 amendments to the bill and co-sponsored an additional 5 amendments. Even “moderate” Republican Olympia Snowe filed 21 amendments of her own along with another 5 she co-sponsored. Republican amendments run the gamut from Jon Kyl’s amendment to prevent “the federal government’s takeover of health care” to Snowe’s amendment proposing a trigger mechanism for the public option should cooperatives fail to insure 95 percent of Americans.

Getting back to our original question: exactly what would GOP-care look like? It is clearly too early to tell, but defeating the Democrats in this debate and in the 2010 midterm elections could very well depend on figuring it out sooner than later.

Tags: America's Healthy Future Act of 2009, Barack Obama, CNN, Denis Calabrese, Dick Armey, disinformation, Grover Norquist, Health Care Freedom Plan, Heritage Foundation, Jim DeMint, Jon Kyl, Max Baucus, Mitch McConnell, Olympia Snowe, Orrin Hatch, Party of No, Patient’s Choice Act, public-option, Senate Finance Committee, State of the Union, The American Spectator, The Daily Beast, Tom Coburn, trigger
Posted in Policy Alternative | Start the Discussion

Presidential math and healthcare reform

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

(UPDATED: With quote from House Ways and Means chairman Charles Rangel)

After a week that saw the fortunes of healthcare reform shift from desperate to hopeful, Congressional Democrats seemed invigorated. Yet, as much of the attention on Capitol Hill shifts to Max Baucus and the Senate Finance Committee and their efforts to come up with a revenue scheme for the Senate version of healthcare reform, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) continues to be the bearer of bad news after reviewing the tri-committee bill that came out of the House earlier in the week. And, President Obama continues to send mixed messages to the American people.

In a letter to House Ways and Means Committee chairman Charles Rangel, the CBO concluded that the $1-trillion America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 would add $239 billion to the federal deficit over the 10-year budget window after considering revenue schemes proposed in the bill - including a controversial tax increase on wealthy Americans and small businesses. President Obama has promised not to sign a reform bill that adds to the federal budget deficit over the next decade.

Of further concern is testimony by CBO director Douglas Elmendorf that suggests the proposed increases in short term spending included in any of the current healthcare reform bills will do nothing to rein in the spiraling costs of healthcare beyond the ten-year window.

“We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount,” Douglas Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, told the Senate Budget Committee. “On the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health-care costs,” he added. (Wall Street Journal)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel called the CBO analysis “a wake-up call.”

Today’s CBO testimony should be a wake-up call. Instead of rushing through one expensive proposal after another, we should take the time we need to get things right—especially at a time when hundreds of thousands of Americans are losing jobs every month. (Full Statement)

Yet, amidst cries from both Republicans and Democrats to slow down and find a way to pay for reform, Obama continued to put the pressure on his former Congressional colleagues in his weekly radio address.

“This is what the debate in Congress is all about: Whether we’ll keep talking and tinkering and letting this problem fester as more families and businesses go under, and more Americans lose their coverage,” the president said, “or whether we’ll seize this opportunity – one we might not have again for generations – and finally pass health insurance reform this year, in 2009.” (Transcript)

The President continues to ignore the CBO numbers saying their analysis is too rigid and doesn’t factor in that as more Americans receive primary care, the less care they will require and that healthcare costs will therefore go down over time as American’s become healthier. This may very well be wishful thinking when you factor in that the people we will be adding to the insured are those previously denied because of costly pre-existing conditions as well as young people and low-income Americans who - by choice or by circumstance - don’t always lead healthy lifestyles.

President Obama isn’t alone in his thinking. Democrat Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which is responsible for financing the House version of a reform bill, also accused the CBO of missing the boat in this exchange with anchor Harry Smith on CBS News’ Face the Nation.

SMITH: Congressman (Rangel), let me start with you. The head of the Congressional Budget Office came out this week; he said the plans he’s looked at so far don’t do the job, nor do — and, in fact, the cost of health care might go up.

Have you guys botched this job so far?

RANGEL: No. I’m surprised that the Congressional Budget Office had these views and didn’t share them with the Ways and Means Committee before we concluded our work. But it’s clear that they’re working with different assumptions than the White House and the Congress is.(Transcript from CQ Politics)

It is unclear whether the President intends to sign a bill that the CBO says will increase the deficit or if he’s going to rely upon his own wishful thinking that the numbers simply aren’t true and he and his staff are more qualified to make economic projections than the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. At best, the President is making a guess. At worst, he’s placing a long-shot bet with taxpayer dollars.

Tags: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, Barack Obama, CBS, Charles Rangel, Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, Face the Nation, House Ways and Means Committee, Max Baucus, Mitch McConnell, Senate Finance Committee
Posted in Horserace | Start the Discussion

CBO to Democrats: Try again …

Tuesday, June 16th, 2009

In a letter to Senate HELP (Health Education Labor and Pensions) Committee Chairman Ted Kennedy, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has concluded that current proposals by Congressional Democrats will significantly increase the federal deficit over the next decade and will fall far short of providing universal access to healthcare for all Americans. Preliminary CBO analysis of Kennedy’s Affordable Health Choices Act finds:

According to that assessment, enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010–2019 period. Once the proposal was fully implemented, about 39 million individuals would obtain coverage through the new insurance exchanges.

At the same time, the number of people who had coverage through an employer would decline by about 15 million (or roughly 10 percent), and coverage from other sources would fall by about 8 million, so the net decrease in the number of people uninsured would be about 16 million.

Translation: Under the Affordable Health Choice Act, the implementation of healthcare reform aimed at providing universal healthcare will result in 36 million Americans left uninsured despite unprecedented increases in government intervention into the healthcare industry. Perhaps most troubling in the CBO’s findings are projected losses of coverage for those already receiving federal assistance through Medicaid and CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Plan).

According to the letter to Kennedy, CBO estimates additional costs as the bill continues to take shape as this analysis does not take into account a government financed public-option insurance plan which would increase the number of insured but also significantly increase the overall cost of reform.

While Democrats vow to charge on with healthcare reform and the White House has not budged from an October 2009 deadline for legislation, Republicans quickly went on the offensive. In a speech on the floor of the Senate, minority leader Mitch McConnell cited the CBO report.

Preliminary estimates for this flawed legislative proposal are staggering. Just yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office released an estimate of just part of the HELP Committee bill. Focusing on just this one section, the CBO determined the bill will spend $1.3 trillion over 10 years, even though 37 million people would still be left without health insurance.

And this isn’t even a complete evaluation of the bill. Large proposals that will have a significant impact on the cost such as a Medicaid expansion and a government run plan have not even been factored in. Moreover, according to the details of this HELP Committee plan, a newly-created health care exchange would result in 15 million Americans losing the employer coverage they currently have — further evidence that if you like what you have, you may well lose it under a government-run plan.

Tags: Affordable Health Choices Act, Children's Health Insurance Plan, Congressional Budget Office, Democrats, healthcare reform, HELP Committee, Medicaid, Mitch McConnell, public-option, Republicans, Ted Kennedy
Posted in Horserace | Start the Discussion

Articles Tagged ‘Mitch McConnell’