Though details of the Senate Democrats' public option compromise
announced by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are scarce, most
media outlets portray the deal as a victory for Democratic
"moderates" -- and one that makes it much more likely that the
reform package will be approved by the Senate in the near term.
In a front-page story, the
New York Times (12/9, A1, Pear, Herszenhorn) reports,
"Under the agreement, people ages 55 to 64 could 'buy in' to
Medicare." And, "the Office of Personnel Management would
negotiate with insurance companies to offer national health
benefit plans, similar to those offered to federal employees,
including members of Congress." The Times adds that "if these
private plans did not meet certain goals for making affordable
coverage available to all Americans, Senate Democratic aides
said, then the government itself would offer a new insurance
plan, somewhat like the 'public option' in the bill Mr. Reid
unveiled three weeks ago."
The AP (12/9, Espo)
reports that "the emerging agreement calls for Medicare to be
opened to uninsured Americans beginning at age 55, a significant
expansion of the large government healthcare program that
currently serves the 65-and-over population." Sen. Tom Harkin
(D-IA), "referring to a deal among the negotiators, told
reporters he didn't like it, but added, 'I'm going to support it
to the hilt' in hopes of securing passage of the healthcare
bill."
Similarly, McClatchy
(12/9, Lightman) notes that the negotiations that led to the
deal were "a bid to win key moderates who've threatened to
derail the effort. ... At least four Democratic moderates are
wary of a government-run plan, saying it could be costly and
expand government's reach, but they want to make coverage more
affordable and available, so that plan is expected to win their
backing."
USA Today (12/9,
Fritze) also says that the "tentative deal" has "bolstered
chances for healthcare legislation passing this year, Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday." Reid said, "We have a
broad agreement. ... For us, it moves this bill way down the
road." However, "shortly after Reid's announcement," Sen. Russ
Feingold (D-WI) "said he is concerned about the approach." Sen.
Feingold said, "While I appreciate the willingness of all
parties to engage in good-faith discussions, I do not support
proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with
a purely private approach."
According to Politico
(12/9, Brown, O'Connor), Howard Dean has "repeatedly called for
the bill's defeat without a pure public option," but said
Tuesday that "the Medicare expansion was a 'big deal.'" Also on
Tuesday, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) "was highly skeptical of a
proposal to expand Medicare and Medicaid -- signaling that her
support for an emerging public option compromise will be
difficult to secure." Meanwhile, Sen. Joe Lieberman, "another
undecided moderate who opposes any version of the public plan,
said "he is encouraged by a proposal to remove the public option
and replace it with a national nonprofit insurance program
administered by a federal agency."
The Washington Post
(12/9, Murray, Montgomery) reports that "when asked whether the
agreement means the end is in sight after nearly a year of work
on President Obama's most important domestic initiative, Reid
smiled. 'The answer's yes,' he said." According to the Post,
"Key liberals said they were prepared to abandon a
government-run insurance program if it would move the chamber
closer to a final deal, provided it was replaced with other
coverage options and tighter restrictions on insurance
companies."
Meanwhile, in a front-page article, the
Wall Street Journal (12/9,
A1, Hitt, Adamy, subscription required) quotes Senate Minority
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) saying, "What's becoming
abundantly clear is that the majority will make any deal, agree
to any terms, sign any dotted line that brings them closer to
final passage of this terrible bill." The
Washington Times (12/9,
Haberkorn) and The Hill
(12/9, Young, subscription required) also cover the story.
"Several options" sent to CBO for analysis.
Bloomberg News (12/9,
Litvan) reports that Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid, said that
Reid "sent 'several options' to the Congressional Budget Office,
including the proposal by the group of senators to allow the
federal agency to administer national insurance plans. He said
that some might see that as another form of the public option."
The Los Angeles Times (12/9,
Hook, Levey) also covers the story.
Hospital groups push against Medicare expansion proposal.
CQ HealthBeat (12/9)
reports that the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the
Federation of American Hospitals (FAH) "issued alerts labeled
'urgent' to their members" on Tuesday, urging their members to
"pressure Senate Democrats to jettison an emerging plan that
would allow certain people of ages 55 to 64 to buy into the
federal Medicare program." The "Medicare buy-in," which emerged
as a compromise alternative among Democrats to the public
option, "would allow the near elderly who don't have access to
affordable employer-sponsored health insurance to pay premiums
to enroll in the Medicare program. But hospitals are saying
enough is enough." According to the AHA, "Adding millions of
people to these programs at a time when they already severely
underfund hospitals is unwise, and should be opposed."
Learn how easy and convenient shopping for health insurance can be. Get your
free health insurance online quotes today!