Harry Reid Selects Baucus, Kerry & Murray For Super Committee; Alan Simpson Disagrees

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Harry Reid's Super Committee Picks: Patty Murray, Max Baucus, John Kerry

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will appoint Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) to the congressional debt-reduction "super committee" tasked with finding roughly $1.5 trillion in savings over the next decade. Murray will serve as one of the committee's two co-chairs, alongside a House Republican.

Reid's office announced the choices, which were first reported by Politico and the National Journal. Reid will make a formal announcement on Wednesday.

In making his picks, the Nevada Democrat becomes the first congressional leader to offer his three appointments to the super committee, who will be granted strong procedural powers to see their recommendations come to a vote. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) still must choose three members each, in advance of an Aug. 16 deadline.

Reid's picks suggest that he favored committee chairs and senior members of the party over some of the younger, more progressive-minded senators. Murray chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and will undoubtedly keep electoral implications in mind as she weighs various policy suggestions. Kerry, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is a top foreign policy voice in the party and will likely play a central role in carving out the cuts made to defense appropriations. Baucus, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, is a leading figure on tax policy, another legislative component that falls within the committee's purview. None of the three were part of the so-called Gang of Six -– the informal bipartisan group of senators who worked to craft a debt reduction plan of their own.

The choices are not particularly trusted in liberal circles either, in part because of concerns that moneyed interests may come in to play when it comes time to negotiate. In FY 2009, for instance, companies in Murray's home state of Washington received $5.2 billion in defense contracts. Boeing Inc. is the fourth biggest contributor to Murray over the course of her career, according to data gathered by the Center for Responsive Politics.

More broadly, good government advocates were concerned that her post atop the DSCC, which comes with significant fundraising responsibilities, would influence her approach to the committee.

“Sen. Patty Murray may be a fine Senator, but putting Senate Democrats’ leading fundraiser in charge of a committee that will see a lobbying push like never before sends the wrong message to the American people,” said Nick Nyhart, president of Public Campaign, in a press release. “Instead of focusing solely on finding a balanced approach to deficit reduction, she will also be focused on raising money from the same interests hoping to influence the committee.”

Baucus, who was a major player in blocking President George W. Bush's efforts to privatize Social Security and was instrumental in crafting the Affordable Care Act, enjoys close ties to the financial sector. According to CRP data, he has received $5.2 million in campaign contributions from the finance, insurance and real estate industries since 2005.

In Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, meanwhile, the defense industry has tripled in size since 2000.

Should the committee not come to an agreement (and it would take only seven of its 12 members to reach one) or if its suggestions are not passed by Congress, then a trigger would be hit, resulting in major spending cuts and reductions in the defense budget.

On Monday, multiple Senate Democratic sources told The Huffington Post that Reid was leaning against including Baucus in his final three. Senate Democratic sources, when asked about the change of heart, said that while it didn't initially appear that Baucus would end up being picked, he was always considered an option. The two enjoy a close relationship in the Senate and even if Baucus hadn't ended up on the committee, he would have likely been expected to contribute –- either through suggestions or staff -– to its work on tax reform.

A Democratic source told The Huffington Post that Kerry "made it into the discussion" of who should serve on the committee by delivering "some powerful speeches" to the rest of the caucus. The speeches, the source added, were in defense of Democratic Party priorities, focusing on the need to protect entitlement programs and Kerry's desire to strongly push back against (what the source referred to as) "the right-wing agenda."


View Larger Map

Sources: Huffington Post, MSNBC, The Young Turks, Youtube, Google Maps

Gang Of Six Plan Cuts Social Security & Lowers Corporate Tax Rates

Gang Of Six Plan Reduces Social Security Benefits By $1,300 A Year, Cuts Corporate Tax Rates

Yesterday, President Obama all but endorsed the deficit reduction plan outlined by the Gang of Six senators. The plan still faces numerous obstacles — it’s incredibly vague on the details, has critics on both sides of the aisle, and may not even be ready by the Aug. 2 default deadline. Liberal Democrats have pointed out the plan is far from a balanced approach, asking seniors and the working poor to bear the brunt of the pain without asking the wealthy or corporations to sacrifice at all.

Two members of the Gang of Six, Senators Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Kent Conrad (D-ND) were positively crowing about the conservative bona fides of their plan yesterday on MSNBC. Because the proposal will actually be scored as a $1.5 trillion tax cut under current law (with the Bush tax cuts set to expire in 2012), they are confident that House Republicans, who have vowed never to vote for a tax increase, will go for it.

The Congressional Budget Office will score the plan as a $1.5 trillion tax cut, as it lowers the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to between 23 and 29 percent, eliminates the alternative minimum tax, and lowers personal income tax rates. But by closing loopholes, the Gang of Six says they’ll raise $1.3 trillion in revenue.

The disparity can only be explained because they employ an accounting gimmick — the two projections use different CBO baselines. The tax cut number is compared to current law, which assumes the Bush tax cuts will expire and the AMT will take effect, neither of which seems likely to happen. The revenue number is compared to a “plausible baseline” (which assumes expiration of the high-end Bush tax cuts).

The plan also recommends “reforming” Social Security in ways that will even affect current retirees. But not a penny of the money saved will go to deficit reduction, which begs the question — why include Social Security at all? The Gang of Six has said all the changes will go toward securing the long-term financial security of the program, but Social Security is already solvent until 2037 and does not contribute to the deficit.

The cuts in the Gang of Six plan aren’t minor, either. It proposes a chained CPI adjustment to Social Security, which may not be a bad idea when combined with other measures to boost benefits and strengthen the program, but on its own is tantamount to a $1,300 cut each year for recipients over their lifetimes. Strengthen Social Security co-chair and former Obama adviser Nancy Altman has denounced the idea as an overly harsh cut. “The chained-CPI is poor policy, and given that seniors vote in disproportionately high numbers, it is equally poor politics,” she said.


View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Think Progress, The Young Turks, Youtube, Google Maps

GOP Rejects "Gang Of Six" Deal! Guarantees Obama's Re-Election! Decision 2012

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Refusing To Compromise Or Agree On ANY Form Of Deal To Increase The Debt Ceiling Limit (A Usually Routine Procedure) Under The Remainder Of Pres. Obama's First Term, Including The One Comprised By "Gang Of Six" Members Is Proof Positive House GOP Leaders On Capitol Hill Especially The Tea Party Clique, Are INTENTIONALLY Trying To Shut Down Our Nation's Federal Government Solely For 2012 Political Gain.

I Repeat!

House GOP Leaders On Capitol Hill, Especially The Tea Party Clique (Led By Michelle Bachmann) Is INTENTIONALLY Trying To Shut Down Our Nation's Federal Government NOT To Reduce The Deficit They Allowed Former Pres. George W. Bush To Run Up With His Tax Cuts For Extremely Wealthy Citizens, 3 Wars, Medicare Advantage For Wealthy Seniors & Awarding His Political Donors With FAT Government Contracts.

No!

Instead House GOP Leaders Are INTENTIONALLY Refusing To Increase In The History Of Our Nation Solely For 2012 Political Gain.

i.e., Get Rid Of Barack Obama; Our Nation's FIRST Black Legally Elected President!

How Can They Sleep At Night?

I Guess People With Cold Hearts Are Nocturnal & In Need Of Very Little Rest.

Cold Hearts?

Now I Understand How House GOP Leaders & Tea Party Members Are Able To So Easily Ignore The Constituents Who Elected Them Into Office.

For Shame!

Can You Say "Obama Is Definitely Guaranteed A 2nd Term & I'm Certain Pelosi WILL Be Re-Hired As House Speaker Too?"

Good-Bye Boehner, Good-Bye Cantor, Good-Bye Bachmann, Good-Bye Tea Party Members.

PEOPLE GET OUT THE VOTE IN 2012!!!

CHOOSE OBAMA & REHIRE PELOSI IN 2012!!






Push for Broad Budget Deal Intensifies Among Leaders


President Obama and Congressional leaders, spurred by a positive response to a new Senate deficit-cutting plan, sought on Wednesday to resurrect a broad budget agreement as House members condemned a fall-back proposal taking shape in the Senate.

Officials in both parties said discussions had accelerated about a compromise tied to a debt limit increase that would cut spending, reshape entitlement programs like Medicare and call for a future tax overhaul — a package that would slice trillions of dollars from projected deficits over the next decade. The talks picked up after a bipartisan group of senators unveiled their deficit plan on Tuesday, with House Republicans signaling that they might now be open to a deal that would raise more money for deficit reduction by closing tax loopholes and eliminating deductions while also reducing tax rates.

Mr. Obama summoned Republican and Democratic leaders to separate White House sessions. And the White House spokesman, Jay Carney, said Mr. Obama would drop his opposition to signing a short-term increase in the federal debt ceiling, but only for an extension of days and only if the two sides were in agreement on the contours of a deal that raised the ceiling through 2012 and made long-term reductions in federal debt. “There is still time to do something significant if all parties are willing to compromise, because the parameters of what that might look like are well known, especially to the participants in the negotiations the president oversaw last week,” Mr. Carney said.

The search for a solution intensified as House Republicans made clear that they were in no mood to accept a proposal being developed by Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, who has advocated a procedural maneuver to allow a debt increase to clear Congress without Republican votes.

The four top House leaders — Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio; Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the No. 2 House Republican; Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader; and Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat — met privately Wednesday and, according to officials, reviewed problems with the McConnell plan. Putting it in place would require some House Republicans to back the idea, but the concept has met with mounting resistance in the House even as a last-ditch effort.

“If there is a state or condition worse than death, that’s where it would be,” Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, said about the McConnell proposal. “I can’t think of one, so we will just go with death for now.”

Senate leaders were still planning to go forward with consideration of the McConnell fallback after considering the “cap, cut and balance” plan that cleared the House on Tuesday but has no chance of passing the Senate, where Democratic leaders assailed it on Wednesday.

“The Republican scheme to cap, cut and kill Medicare is dead on arrival in the Senate,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate. “Their plan, which passed the House last night on a virtual party-line vote, would wreak havoc on our country’s seniors, the middle class, military preparedness and our standing in the world.”

To improve the prospects for the McConnell plan in the Senate, the leadership was drawing up a list of spending cuts that would be attached to it as well as other deficit-cutting proposals to sweeten the pot.

Though negotiations over a more comprehensive deal had faltered, Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehner have continued to talk, including at a private White House meeting Sunday that was also attended by Mr. Cantor. Both Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor also said positive things about the deficit plan crafted by the so-called Gang of Six, which includes three Senate Republican and three Senate Democrats.

Lawmakers said that the proposal would not necessarily provide the definitive solution to the debt impasse but that the welcoming response from both parties showed there was a potential consensus over long-term approaches to reducing the debt and the deficit.

If the president is to proceed with a major agreement, one of his chief hurdles could be winning some support from leaders in the Senate, where neither Mr. Reid nor Mr. McConnell has embraced the Gang of Six plan and the two had teamed up to enact Mr. McConnell’s approach.

Despite widespread talk of a breakthrough after the Gang of Six re-emerged on Tuesday, administration officials privately are increasingly fretful that Congress’s schedule leaves no room for error before the government hits its borrowing limit on Aug. 2, when an error — in terms of unsuccessful votes — is a real possibility given House Republicans’ unwillingness to compromise with the White House.

The situation is reviving memories in both parties of two previous times that House Republicans rebelled against their leadership’s compromises, provoking such negative market reactions that the Republicans quickly retreated — in late September 2008, when the House initially rejected President George W. Bush’s proposed bailout of the financial system, and in October 1990, when House Republicans opposed a deficit-reduction compromise that President George Bush had negotiated with Congress’s Democratic leaders.

“This time is unfortunately more consequential,” said a senior administration official.

On Aug. 3, should the government hit its debt ceiling, the expectation is that the bond-rating agency Standard & Poor’s, and perhaps others, would carry out a warning to downgrade the United States credit rating. That likely would raise the Treasury’s borrowing costs on Aug. 4, when it has scheduled an auction to raise money for $90 billion in principal and interest due to creditors. And the higher interest rates for the government would ripple to loans for businesses and consumers.

The outline of legislation that could pass both the Democratic-controlled Senate and the Republican-controlled House is emerging but still highly uncertain, and complicated significantly by the short amount of time left. What is certain, say people in both parties, is that the action will go down to the wire with no guarantee of legislative success.

“The idea of an 11th-hour bill whose passage is not assured make me very nervous, and I don’t think the markets understand how nervous they should be,” said one official involved in the negotiations.

Behind the scenes, representatives of JPMorgan Chase, led by its president and chief executive, Jamie Dimon, have been particularly active in pressing for a resolution. Jay Powell, a former official in the administration of the elder George Bush, was brought into the House Republican caucus by party leaders to brief the rank and file on the ramifications.


Sources: CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, PBS News, Politico, Russia Today, Youtube

Health Care Reform Bill Advances Toward Landmark Senate Vote...Next, Nancy Pelosi

(Key Senate vote looms on health care bill. After months of debate, the Senate Finance Committee is set to hold a landmark vote on health-care reform legislation today. NBC’s Chuck Todd reports.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Voting on the Baucus Health Care Reform bill.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Big vote for health overhaul in committee

(Insurance industries ambush health reform bill. Newsweek’s Howard Fineman discusses allegations made by insurance industries that the Senate Finance Committee’s reform bill will cost the consumer too much money.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

President Barack Obama's plan to remake the nation's health care system is about to take its biggest step yet toward becoming reality.

The pivotal Senate Finance Committee was poised to approve sweeping legislation Tuesday requiring nearly all Americans to purchase insurance and ushering in a host of other changes to the nation's $2.5 trillion medical system.

Much work would lie ahead before a bill could arrive on Obama's desk, but action by the Finance Committee would mark a significant advance, capping numerous delays as Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., held marathon negotiating sessions — ultimately unsuccessful — aimed at producing a bipartisan bill.

Four other congressional committees acted before August to pass health legislation, so for months all eyes have been on the Finance Committee, the remaining one. It's also the panel whose moderate makeup most closely resembles the Senate as a whole. And the committee's centrist legislation is seen as the best building block for a compromise plan that could find favor on the Senate floor.

With Democrats holding a 13-10 majority on the committee the outcome of Tuesday's vote is not in doubt. The big question mark is whether moderate Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine will become the first Republican to support a health overhaul bill. The legislation that passed the other House and Senate committees did so without a single Republican vote. On Monday, Snowe still wasn't saying.

With Finance Committee passage, Obama's top domestic priority will have advanced farther than former President Bill Clinton's effort ever did. The Clinton health plan never made it through all the congressional committees with jurisdiction.

Last minute strategy

The final days before Tuesday's long-anticipated vote were rocky. After playing nice for months, the health insurance industry released a report contending that the legislation would cause hefty increases in health insurance premiums.

Democrats and their allies scrambled Monday to knock it down. "Distorted and flawed," said White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass. AARP's senior policy strategist, John Rother, called it "fundamentally dishonest."

PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accounting firm that did the industry-commissioned analysis, issued a statement late Monday acknowledging it did not look at the entirety of the legislation, only the effects of four provisions that the insurance group wanted analyzed.

The drama threatened to overshadow the vote on the 10-year, $829-billion plan that Baucus has touted as the sensible solution to America's problems of high medical costs and too many uninsured.

What's in the bill?

The bill includes consumer protections such as limits on copays and deductibles and relies on federal subsidies to help lower-income families purchase coverage. Insurance companies would have to take all comers, and people could shop for insurance within new state marketplaces called exchanges.

Medicaid would be expanded, and though employers wouldn't be required to cover their workers, they'd have to pay a penalty for each employee who sought insurance with government subsidies. The bill is paid for by cuts to Medicare providers and new taxes on insurance companies and others.

Unlike the other health care bills in Congress, Baucus' would not allow the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies, a divisive element sought by liberals.

Last-minute changes made subsidies more generous and softened the penalties for those who don't comply with a proposed new mandate for everyone to buy insurance. The latter change drew the ire of the health insurance industry, which said that without a strong and enforceable requirement not enough people would get insured, and premiums would jump for everyone else.

The industry report was timed just ahead of the vote on Baucus' bill but the industry was already looking ahead to negotiations on a final package to bring to the Senate floor.

Once the Finance Committee has acted, the dealmaking can begin in earnest with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., working with White House staff, Baucus and others to blend the Finance bill with a more liberal version passed by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

A major question mark is whether Reid will include some version of a so-called public plan in the merged bill. Across the Capitol, House Democratic leaders are working to finalize their bill, which does contain a public plan, and floor action is expected in both chambers in coming weeks. If passed, the legislation would then go to a conference committee to reconcile differences.



View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Google Maps

Republicans Attack Baucus' HC Reform Bill Like Vultures!...Key Dems Hate It Too

America's Healthy Future Act:

You can download and read a copy of the Health Care bill from this link at Senate.gov


(Sen. Max Baucus unveils his Health Care Reform bill which pleases Insurance companies. I can just hear the Insurance co Execs laughing with glee. He tells the American people "we can't allow this historic opportunity to pass us by")

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Will there be Republican support for this particular bill? I doubt it. In fact it doesn't matter what kind of bill is drafted, the GOP has no plans to support Pres. Obama's Health Care Reform agenda at all!)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(GOP Operatives are working hard to derail Pres. Obama's Health Care Reform agenda.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Senate's 10-year health fix would cost $856B

Sen. Max Baucus on Wednesday brought out the much-awaited Finance Committee version of an American health-system remake — a landmark $856 billion, 10-year measure that starts a rough ride through Congress without visible Republican backing.

The bill by Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, would make major changes to the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system, including requiring all individuals to purchase health care or pay a fine, and language prohibiting insurance company practices like charging more to people with more serious health problems.

At a Capitol Hill news conference, the Montana senator cited the rising costs of health care as an imperative to act. He said lawmakers cannot let this opportunity pass. He said he expects Republican support when his committee finally acts. Baucus said it is "a good bill. This is a balanced bill."

Consumers would be able to shop for and compare insurance plans in a new purchasing exchange. Medicaid would be expanded, and caps would be placed on patients' yearly health care costs. The plan would be paid for with $507 billion in cuts to government health programs and $349 billion in new taxes and fees, including a tax on high-end insurance plans and fees on insurance companies and medical device manufacturers.

The bill fails to fulfill President Barack Obama's aim of creating a new government-run insurance plan — or option — to compete with the private market. It proposes instead a system of nonprofit member-owned cooperatives, somewhat akin to electric co-ops that exist in many places around the country. That was one of many concessions meant to win over Republicans.

In other ways though, including its overall cost and payment mechanisms, the bill tracks closely with the priorities Obama laid out in his speech to Congress last week.

Baucus is still holding out hope for GOP support when his committee actually votes on the bill, probably as early as next week.

The measure represents the most moderate health care proposal in Congress so far, compared to legislation approved by three committees in the House and the Senate's health panel. Obama's top domestic priority is to revamp the health care system to provide coverage to nearly 50 million Americans who lack it and to rein in rising costs.

The bill includes provisions to keep illegal immigrants from obtaining health coverage through the new insurance exchanges — reflecting the White House's newly stringent stance on the issue after a Republican House member interrupted Obama's speech last week to accuse him of lying about it.

The bill also would prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or if the life of the mother would be endangered. It's all but certain that the Baucus provisions will not be the last word on either of those volatile issues.

The bill would set up a verification system to make sure people buying insurance in the exchanges are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants, using Social Security data and Homeland Security Department files. The bill would impose penalties for fraud and identity theft.

While only legal residents would be able to buy coverage through the exchanges, illegal immigrant parents would be able to get insurance for their U.S. born children.

The bill would prohibit abortion from being included in any minimum benefits package. However, plans in the exchange could offer unrestricted coverage for abortions, provided that no funds from government subsidies are used to pay for them. Women who want coverage for abortions would have to pay for it with their own money.

Wednesday's bill release follows months of negotiations among Baucus and five other Finance Committee senators dubbed the "Gang of Six" — Republicans Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Mike Enzi of Wyoming and Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Democrats Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico.

Enzi said he couldn't support the Baucus bill and preferred an incremental approach. "Let's start by focusing on the issues where we already have broad, bipartisan agreement," he said.

In the end, Democrats believe Snowe may be the only Republican to support the bill, though she wasn't ready to commit her support Tuesday night. "Hopefully at some point through the committee process we can reach an agreement," she said.

The bill drew quick criticism from Republican leaders.

"This partisan proposal cuts Medicare by nearly a half-trillion dollars, and puts massive new tax burdens on families and small businesses, to create yet another thousand-page, trillion-dollar government program," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "Only in Washington would anyone think that makes sense, especially in this economy."

Many liberals also have concerns. Some wanted Baucus to include a public option, while others fear that, in his effort to hold down the price of his bill, Baucus didn't do enough to make health coverage affordable to working-class Americans. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., a member of the Finance Committee, said Tuesday that he couldn't support the bill in its current form.

Baucus' plan, released as a detailed 223-page summary, aims to make health insurance more affordable for self-employed people and those working for small companies, who now have the biggest problems in getting and keeping coverage.

People insured through large employers would not see major changes, but some of their health care benefits would be nicked to help pay for the cost of the plan. The Baucus proposal would limit to $2,000 a year the amount people can contribute to flexible spending accounts, which are used to cover copayments and deductibles not paid by their employers. That provision would raise $16.5 billion over 10 years.

Everyone covered through an employer would learn the full costs of their health benefits, which starting next year would be reported on employees' W-2 tax forms. Although family coverage averages about $13,000 a year most workers don't know how much their employer is paying.

Not carrying insurance could result in a steep fine, as much as $3,800 per family, or $950 for an individual. People who can't afford their premiums would be exempted from the fine.

The plan proposes a $6 billion annual fee on health insurance providers, which would recoup some of the profits the companies expect to make from millions of new taxpayer-subsidized customers.

Unlike the health care bill written by majority Democrats in the House, which permanently rolls back scheduled cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, the Baucus plan only suspends the reductions for one year. That trims more than $100 billion from the cost of the bill, but has already led to criticism from the American Medical Association.

The legislation makes no changes in medical malpractice laws. It does incorporate Obama's call for federal funds for state experiments on alternatives to malpractice lawsuits.

Democratic leaders are aiming for votes in the full House and Senate this fall.



View Larger Map

Sources: Senate.gov, MSNBC, NY Times, Politico, ABC News, Zimbio, Google Maps

Max Baucus Unveils Ineffective 10-Yr, $856 B, Bi-Partisan HC Reform Bill...A Plan To Sink Obama's Agenda

(Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., joins the Morning Joe gang to discuss Health Care Reform just hours before the release of Max Baucus' committee's bill.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Pres. Obama administration has exposed the greed of Health Care Insurance companies. No wonder they're angry.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Is it safe to say that the G.O.P.'s agenda involves stopping Health Care Reform because it benefits them personally? Yeah!)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Max Baucus releases Health Care Bill

Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) proposed an $856 billion plan Wednesday to overhaul the health care system, releasing a bill after months of bipartisan negotiations without any immediate Republican support.

The bill forces insurance companies to change the way they do business, such as prohibiting them from dropping or denying coverage based on preexisting conditions. To force competition with private insurers, Baucus chose creating nonprofit consumer-owned cooperatives over the public insurance option, which most Democrats prefer.

“This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long,” Baucus said in a statement this morning. “We worked to build a balanced, common-sense package that ensures quality, affordable coverage and doesn’t add a dime to the deficit.”

The long-awaited bill sets off a battle over what could be the shape of a health reform deal that wins at least one or two Republicans votes in the Senate. By trying to add measures to appeal to some

Democrats and some Republicans, Baucus has managed to upset all sides. But what he came up with could be viewed as the kind of balanced approach that threads the needle to achieve a final compromise.

None of the three Republicans involved in the bipartisan negotiations have signed onto the bill, saying there are outstanding issues that need to be resolved. But they said they would continue talking with Baucus and the other two Democrats in the so-called Gang of Six.

The lack of Republican support — at the outset, at least — suggests Democrats will need to make more concessions if they hope to produce a bipartisan bill. Otherwise, the Senate leadership may have to use a last-ditch procedural maneuver known as reconciliation to move the bill through the chamber with 51 votes.

The absence of Republicans could also damage President Barack Obama's efforts to convince Americans that his reform plan has broad support.

The Finance Committee markup is expected to begin Tuesday. Baucus will meet Thursday with the full committee, and amendments will be due Friday at 5 p.m.

The Baucus plan is a more conservative approach than those produced by three committees in the House and by the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, but it tracks closely with the concepts that Obama promoted in his speech to Congress last week. The bill is deficit neutral and fully paid for, and less costly than bills approved by other committees.

Baucus chose an alternative to the public insurance option – nongovernmental consumer cooperatives – to provide competition with private insurers.

The bill requires individuals to buy insurance, or else face penalties as high as $3,800 for a family. It would not mandate businesses to provide coverage for their employees – as the House bills do – but it would require them to defray the cost of any government subsidies for which their employees would qualify.

To pay for the overhaul, the legislation calls for imposing a 35 percent excise tax on high-end insurance plans, assessing fees on industry players, including device manufacturers, insurers and clinical laboratories, and making a series of tax code changes.

The bill expands Medicaid coverage to include adults whose incomes are 133 percent above the poverty line, and requires states to pick up more of the tab for the federal-state cost-sharing program.

Government subsidies would be available to families between 100 percent and 300 percent of the poverty line to purchase insurance plans through a new marketplace known as an exchange.

For families with incomes 300 percent and 400 percent of poverty, their annual premiums would be capped at 13 percent of their income. It’s a level that Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) says is too high, but it would be less than the current average cost of a family insurance plan, which is $13,375, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the likeliest Republicans to support the bill, said she is waiting for cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, which she has not yet seen.

"Hopefully at some point through the committee process we can reach an agreement," Snowe said Tuesday.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released a statement Tuesday that was silent on his ultimate decision, but the tone of his message does not bode well for Baucus’s hopes of bringing him on board.

He ticked off a long list of concerns, saying the bill “does not meet the shared goals for affordable, accessible health coverage,” and it does not resolve outstanding issues dealing with abortion and illegal immigration. He suggested the bill does not include his alternative proposal to the individual mandate, nor does it include stronger medical liability reform measures he had pushed.

“We’ve been clear from the start that we’re willing to stay at the table,” Grassley said. “There’s no reason not to keep working until we get it right. In the end, legislation that impacts every American should have strong bipartisan support.”




Senate Health Bill Draws Fire on Both Sides

The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee said Tuesday that he could not support sweeping health care legislation drafted in more than three months of bipartisan negotiations by the chairman of the panel, and several liberal Democrats criticized the bill from the other side of the political spectrum.

The statement by the Republican, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, came just as the chairman, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, put the final touches on his bill to provide health benefits to millions of the uninsured.

“Unfortunately,” Mr. Grassley said, “we’re operating under an artificial deadline set by the Democratic leadership and the White House. I’m disappointed because it looks like we’re being pushed aside by the Democratic leadership so the Senate can move forward on a bill that, up to this point, does not meet the shared goals for affordable, accessible health coverage.”

Mr. Grassley, who participated in the bipartisan negotiations, said he wanted to lower the overall cost of the bill. In addition, he said he wanted stronger guarantees that federal money would not be used to pay for abortions or to subsidize health insurance for illegal immigrants, and he is seeking unspecified “medical malpractice reforms.”

At the same time, Mr. Grassley said he hoped to “stay at the table” working with Democrats. “Legislation that impacts every American should have strong bipartisan support,” he said.

For their part, liberal Democrats said Mr. Baucus’s bill did not go far enough to make insurance affordable to people with low and moderate incomes.

One of the Democrats, Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, said he could not vote for the bill in its current form, in part because it did not include a new government insurance plan to compete with private insurers.

“The way it is now, there’s no way I can vote for the Senate package,” Mr. Rockefeller said.

His comment came just minutes after President Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, met separately with House and Senate Democrats in the Capitol. Mr. Axelrod said it was urgent for Congress to overhaul the health care system, Mr. Obama’s top domestic priority, and he cited public opinion polls to support his contention that Americans shared the president’s view.

Congressional Democrats voiced their concerns as Mr. Baucus prepared to unveil a detailed proposal, on which he wants the panel to vote next week.

Four other Congressional committees have approved health care bills drafted by Democrats and passed without any Republican support.

Democrats expressed a variety of concerns. Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said Mr. Baucus, by paring the cost of the bill, had also cut the subsidies that would help people buy insurance.

“This is reducing coverage for poor and working people,” Mr. Rangel said, adding that such cuts “could destroy the bill.”

The House bill, in its current form, is expected to cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years, while Senate Democrats said the price tag for the Baucus proposal would be $880 billion or less.

Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said he doubted that subsidies in the Baucus bill would be enough to enable middle-income people to buy insurance without straining family budgets, and he vowed to seek changes.

Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, challenged Mr. Baucus’s plan to help finance coverage of the uninsured by imposing $4 billion a year in fees on manufacturers of medical devices and diagnostic products.

Mr. Baucus’s plan, like the other major bills in Congress, would expand Medicaid to cover childless adults and other people with incomes less than 133 percent of the poverty level ($29,327 for a family of four).

In a telephone conference call with governors on Tuesday, Mr. Baucus said states would have to help pay the cost of covering people newly eligible for Medicaid. But he tried to allay the concerns of governors, who oppose any type of “unfunded mandate.”

Under Mr. Baucus’s proposal, the federal government would pay most of the new Medicaid costs — at least 80 percent in high-income states like Connecticut and 95 percent in poor states like Mississippi.

This represents a significant increase in the federal share. Medicaid is jointly financed by the federal government and the states, and the federal share — not counting extra money provided under the economic stimulus program — ranges from 50 percent to nearly 80 percent.

Mr. Baucus promised aid to states that have already expanded their Medicaid programs along the lines of his proposal. But officials in two such states, Massachusetts and Vermont, said they needed more details about the proposal to know how they would be affected.




View Larger Map

Sources: Politico, NY Times, Washington Post, AP, Google Maps

"Gang Of Six" Hinders Progress With More Questionable Demands... Proposes Fines For Uninsured

(Against the backdrop of Montana’s belief that the best government is the least government, Sen. Max Baucus is pushing a health plan that relies on federal support. NBC’s Kerry Sanders reports.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Let's start out with who the Gang of Six are:

DEMOCRATS:

Sen. Max Baucus (Mont.), chairman

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (N.M.)

Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.)

Baucus and Conrad are moderates and have not been as adamant about pursuing the public option as liberals in their party. Conrad has floated the alternative of co-ops -- privately owned entities that could help bring costs down -- but the concept has not caught on with many.

REPUBLICANS:

Sen. Mike Enzi (Wyo.)

Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa)

Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine)

Enzi and Grassley are conservatives who have stressed they will not vote for a bill that includes universal coverage and either tax increases or Medicare cuts. Snowe, a moderate, has recently emerged with a compromise that does not include the public option at the start, but would have a trigger that would create a public option if particular conditions are not met over a period of time.

THE ISSUES:

While the health care debate raged across the country over the summer, the Gang of Six continued to work on a solution. However their cooperative nature showed cracks at the end of last month. Perhaps the worst was when Democrats called out Grassley, who is up for re-election next year, for his fundraising letter asking people for "support in helping me defeat Obama-care." White House senior adviser David Axelrod replied that Grassley's statements "were not exactly consistent with good-faith negotiations."

Baucus set a deadline of Sept. 15 to draft the committee's bill. With the differences among the Gang of Six and the political land mines their decisions face, the bill might look more like a patchwork for some votes than a consensus for many. Should the plan include Snowe's "trigger" compromise, it might appeal to moderates -- including Maine's other Republican senator, Susan Collins -- as well as liberal Democrats, helping garner at least 60 votes in the full Senate.

Should the bill exclude the public option, a pivotal vote on the Finance Committee might come from New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez, who has been vocal in supporting the public option. His stance might be a bellwether to see how other liberals will vote.



Fines proposed for going without insurance

Americans would be fined up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance under a plan that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as divisions among Democrats undercut President Barack Obama's effort to regain traction on his health care overhaul.

As Obama talked strategy with Democratic leaders at the White House, the one idea that most appeals to his party's liberal base lost ground in Congress. Prospects for a government-run plan to compete with private insurers sank as a leading moderate Democrat said he could no longer support the idea.

The fast-moving developments put Obama in a box. As a candidate, he opposed fines to force individuals to buy health insurance, and he supported setting up a public insurance plan. On Tuesday, fellow Democrats publicly begged to differ on both ideas.

Democratic congressional leaders put on a bold front as they left the White House after their meeting with the president.

"We're re-energized; we're ready to do health care reform," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., insisted the public plan is still politically viable. "I believe that a public option will be essential to our passing a bill in the House of Representatives," she said.

After a month of contentious forums, Americans were seeking specifics from the president in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night. So were his fellow Democrats, divided on how best to solve the problem of the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured.

The latest proposal: a 10-year, $900-billion bipartisan compromise that Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., a moderate who heads the influential Finance Committee, was trying to broker. It would guarantee coverage for nearly all Americans, regardless of medical problems.

But the Baucus plan also includes the fines that Obama has rejected. In what appeared to be a sign of tension, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs pointedly noted that the administration had not received a copy of the plan before it leaked to lobbyists and news media Tuesday.

Time is running out....

The Baucus plan would require insurers to take all applicants, regardless of age or health. But smokers could be charged higher premiums. And 60-year-olds could be charged five times as much for a policy as 20-year-olds.

Baucus said Tuesday he's trying to get agreement from a small group of bipartisan negotiators in advance of Obama's speech. "Time is running out very quickly," he said. "I made that very clear to the group."

Some experts consider the $900-billion price tag a relative bargain because the country now spends about $2.5 trillion a year on health care. But it would require hefty fees on insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry to help pay for it.

Just as auto coverage is now mandatory in nearly all states, Baucus would require that all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled. Penalties for failing to do so would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level — about $66,000 for a family of four — would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Baucus would offer tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers paying about average middle-class wages. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.

The fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.

"Punishing families who can't afford health care to begin with just doesn't make sense," he said during his party's primaries. At the time, he proposed mandatory insurance only for children.

Public Option in doubt

White House officials have since backed away somewhat from Obama's opposition to mandated coverage for all, but there's no indication that Obama would support fines.

One idea that Obama championed during and since the campaign — a government insurance option — appeared to be sinking fast.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters a Medicare-like plan for middle-class Americans and their families isn't an essential part of legislation for him. Hoyer's comments came shortly after a key Democratic moderate said he could no longer back a bill that includes a new government plan.

The fast-moving developments left liberals in a quandary. They've drawn a line, saying they won't vote for legislation if it doesn't include a public plan to compete with private insurance companies and force them to lower costs.

Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who once supported a public option, said Tuesday that after hearing from constituents during the August recess, he's changed his mind.

"If House leadership presents a final bill that contains a government-run public option, I will oppose it," Ross said.

House Democrats are considering a fallback: using the public plan as a last resort if after a few years the insurance industry has failed to curb costs.

Non-profit Co-ops

Obama's commitment to a public plan has been in question and lawmakers hoped his speech to Congress would make his position on that clear.

Baucus is calling for nonprofit co-ops to compete in the marketplace instead of a public plan.

An 18-page summary of the Baucus proposal was obtained by The Associated Press. The complex plan would make dozens of changes in the health care system, many of them contentious. For example, it includes new fees on insurers, drug companies, medical device manufacturers and clinical labs.

People working for major employers would probably not see big changes. The plan is geared to helping those who now have the hardest time getting and keeping coverage: the self-employed and small business owners.


Max Baucus to Gang of Six: "Time is running out"

As Congress waits on the president’s health care speech Wednesday, Barack Obama is in the unusual position of waiting on six senators most of the public couldn't pick out in a crowd.

They’ll decide whether Obama has any hope of getting significant Republican votes for health reform — or whether he will have to go it alone with only Democrats, a politically risky path.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) gave the bipartisan Gang of Six until 10 a.m. Wednesday to submit ideas on his compromise health reform bill. At that point, he will decide whether to continue the talks or possibly abandon hopes of a broadly bipartisan bill.

The goal is to have a decision ahead of Obama’s speech to a joint session of Congress — and whatever Baucus decides could chart the course of health care reform in the Congress.

Baucus’s compromise bill is, in effect, the last hope to achieve Obama’s goal of getting significant Republican support for an overhaul of the U.S. health care system. But two of the last Republican negotiators, Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Mike Enzi of Wyoming, have signaled in recent weeks that they might not be able to sign on to a compromise. If not, Baucus said Tuesday he would go ahead with his bill anyway.

“Time is running out very quickly, and I suspect I will be making some decisions very quickly,” Baucus said. “On the one hand, I want to work to get a solution, but I want to make clear that we aren’t going to dally.”

Baucus has proposed legislation that does not include the public insurance option favored by liberals but does include health care cooperatives. He also supports a new tax on health insurers who provide high-cost plans and a new fee on insurance companies to pay for reform, designed to raise $6 billion per year starting in 2010.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), a member of the Gang of Six, said he supports Baucus’s framework. But he cautioned that since the group is waiting on cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, it will be hard to reach a final agreement before Obama’s speech.

“It’s very good,” Conrad said. “Very credible, very responsible. Paid for. Bends the cost curve in the right way. Will expand coverage to about 94 percent of the American people. That’s pretty darn good.”

Baucus’s announcement capped a day that was strangely quiet on the health care front, with all sides seeming to sense that anything said before Obama’s speech Wednesday might well be obsolete by the time he finishes his address to Congress.

But if the White House was looking for signs of encouragement ahead of the president’s address, there were few to be found. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) met with Obama at the White House — and Pelosi emerged from the meeting saying that the public insurance option remains “essential” to passing a bill in the House, despite repeated signals from the White House that Obama doesn’t consider it essential at all.

A leading negotiator for the Blue Dog Democrats, Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas, said he could no longer support a bill in Congress that included the public option, even though he agreed to a compromise in July that included such a plan. Also, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a key moderate, said it would be tough for him to support a bill that had no Republican support.

“To have any credibility, this has to have as broad of bipartisan support as possible – and I think we get better legislation that way, I think that this is a moderate version now of health care reform compared to the two bills – the House bill and the Senate bill that are there,” Nelson said. “And I think it’s more moderate in part because the chairman is seeking bipartisan support. And bipartisan support may have been sought in the other instances but it wasn’t successful.”

And one of Obama’s top campaign advisers, Steve Hildebrand, channeled the liberal frustration with Obama in an interview with POLITICO, saying Obama “needs to be more bold in his leadership” on health care reform and other topics.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs declined to preview the speech in detail, beyond saying that members of Congress would know clearly what Obama wants in a bill. Gibbs also said Obama continues to believe that a public health insurance option is a “very valuable tool” to provide needed competition to private insurers — even amid signals that Obama will say he is willing to sign a bill without a public option.

If there was a glimmer of positive news for Obama, it came from Baucus, who kept alive the idea that there could be Republican votes for a health reform bill.

The bipartisan group of six senators met Tuesday for the first time since recess, and going into the meeting, Republicans were noncommittal. Grassley and Enzi declined to say where they were headed on Baucus’s bill, which contains elements that both senators have resisted, including the creation of nonprofit insurance cooperatives.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who is widely believed to be one of the only Republicans willing to sign on to the Baucus bill, struck a more upbeat note than did her fellow Republicans.

“There are number of promising elements, some of which we have had a consensus on; others we continue to discuss,” Snowe said.

But as to whether she could support the Baucus proposal, Snowe said “that is still premature.”

Baucus gave the president a boost by presenting a plan that broadly overlaps the work of four other committees and by making clear that he intends to move ahead with or without Grassley, his trusted ally on the Finance Committee. Capitol Hill observers had questioned whether Baucus would force the Republicans’ hand after relenting several times to Republican requests for more time.

The talk on K Street and Capitol Hill was that Baucus wants to schedule the committee markup for the week of Sept. 21, which would put the Senate much closer to acting on a bill in October. The Finance Committee would need to pass a bill by the end of this month, leaving time to negotiate a merger with a bill passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Baucus said he has not formally proposed a date to begin the markup but would move ahead soon.

“It just really comes down to a matter of political will to get this put together,” Baucus said. “There are clearly some substantive suggestions that some of the members had. But to be honest, my own view is that a lot of this comes down to political will. I am just hopeful that the president gives his statement tomorrow night and that will help move the ball forward very expeditiously.”

On Republican concerns, Baucus said: “There are a couple of points there that may make sense. I asked each of the five to give several ideas back to me so I can decide what next course of action makes the most sense.”

Senate Republican staffers drafted their critique of the Baucus bill, noting that it still leaves out key cost details, such as how much federal funding the insurance cooperatives would get, and contains other issues that are troubling to Republicans, including an “unsustainable” Medicare expansion, the $900 billion price tag, the lack of a permanent fix to the payment system for physicians, and a “broad expansion of government authority over health care.”

One other aspect of the Baucus’s $900 billion plan that’s likely to be controversial: a mandate that would require every American to either purchase coverage or face a penalty.

Baucus set the fines at a maximum of $950 for an individual and $3,800 for a family above 300 percent of the poverty line. For families at 100 percent to 300 percent of the poverty line, the maximum penalty is $750 for an individual and $1,500 for a family.

Republicans found one provision they liked: allowing younger people to buy only lower-cost catastrophic coverage. “It’s a model we should consider for more people – especially people with higher incomes,” according to the Republican critique of the plan.

At the same time, progressive lawmakers kept up their pressure campaign on Obama over the public option.

“Wednesday night will either mark the beginning of the battle or the sad start of a retreat,” Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) said. “Only the president can decide which.”

During a conference call last week with the president, progressives and members of the Congressional Black Caucus told Obama it was too early to offer concessions, particularly any that would trim programs from lower-income communities.

“A health reform bill without a robust public option will not achieve the health reform this country so desperately needs,” Weiner said. “We cannot vote for anything less.”


Key Senators Discuss Trimming Health Bill

Senate health-care negotiators agreed late Thursday to ignore the increasingly strident rhetoric from Republican and Democratic leaders and to keep working toward a bill that can win broad support from the rank-and-file in both parties, according to sources familiar with the talks.

In a conference call, the three Democratic and three Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee agreed to redouble their efforts to craft a less costly alternative to the trillion-dollar initiatives so far put forward in Congress. They discussed the possibility of also reining in the scope of their package, the sources said.

The senators rejected the idea of imposing a deadline on their negotiations, and they agreed to talk again Sept. 4 -- four days before lawmakers are scheduled to return to Washington from their August break. The consensus, one participant said, was "to take your time to get it right."

In a written statement released after the approximately 90-minute teleconference, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the finance panel, said the group had "a productive conversation" and that they "remain committed to continuing our path toward a bipartisan health-care reform bill."

"Our discussion included an increased emphasis on affordability and reducing costs, and our efforts moving forward will reflect that focus," he said.

Before leaving for the month-long recess, Baucus had pegged the cost of the negotiators' ideas at less than $900 billion over the next decade. Thursday's discussions focused on driving that cost lower, the sources said.

The senators also shared tales from their home states, where some lawmakers have been besieged by protesters angry about a potential government takeover of the nation's health-care system.

Attention has focused for the past week on the prospects of the Finance Committee negotiators' talks, after the senior Republican member, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), infuriated some Democrats by refusing to debunk a false rumor that the House's health-care bill would spawn "death panels," empowered to decide whether the sick and the old get to live or die.

Other leading Republicans -- including Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (Ariz.) and House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) -- seemed to press the attack, asserting that no Republican would ever vote for many of the key features of President Obama's health-care overhaul.

Grassley has since denied trying to undermine the reform effort, and his Democratic colleagues said there was no partisan rancor in Thursday night's conference call. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats said the finance panel will be allowed to keep trying to hash out a deal for at least several more weeks.

In a radio interview broadcast from the White House Thursday afternoon, Obama reasserted his commitment to working with Republicans on health reform, saying: "My attitude has always been, let's see if we can get this done with some consensus. I would love to have more Republicans engaged and involved in this process." But Obama said he believes some Republicans have decided, " 'Let's not give them a victory and maybe we can have a replay of 1993-94.' . . . I think there are some folks who are taking a page out of that playbook."

Before heading out of town on vacation, the president planned to meet Friday with former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, a consummate legislative strategist who had been the president's first choice to lead the administration's drive for health reform.

"We are willing to make compromises," Obama told his radio audience. But he said he is not willing to give up on "core principles."

Obama tried to clear up what he described as confusion surrounding his health-care proposal. He described the public option -- a government-run provider -- as only a small, and optional, part of his overall initiative.

"What we've said is, we think that's a good idea," Obama said of publicly funded health insurance. "We haven't said that's the only aspect."

Obama repeated his aides' contention that the White House continues to regard a public option as not essential. "The press got a little excited, and some folks on the left got a little excited," he said. "Our position on this hasn't changed."

Lawmakers from both parties have voiced resistance to the public option proposal, but liberal Democrats have been increasingly outspoken in their conviction that it must remain intact for health-care reform to be meaningful.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declared Thursday that a government-run health insurance program is mandatory in a House bill, and she knocked down speculation that any health-care bill from her chamber might be watered down before it is brought to a vote, presumably in September.

"I don't know how you would scale it down," Pelosi said in San Francisco. "There's no way I can pass a bill in the House of Representatives without a public option." The bill has passed out of three House committees, in each case including a public option.

Pres. Obama was a guest of Philadelphia-based radio talk show host Michael Smerconish, a contrarian, sometimes right-leaning commentator who broke ranks with conservatives last year to support the president in the election. Later in the day, Obama participated in a forum with supporters at the Democratic National Committee headquarters on the same subject.


Sources: MSNBC, Politico, Washington Post, Whitehouse.gov, NBC San Diego, NJ.com, Wikipedia