Senate panel’s health plan widely opposed

The Senate Finance Committee’s health care proposal, long seen as the compromise that would restart President Obama’s drive for reform, drew no Republican support, alienated some Democrats and worried members of both parties who feared that its costs were still too high.

The $856 billion, 10-year plan, issued by Chairman Max Baucus on Wednesday, would require nearly all individuals to carry insurance coverage or pay a fine, end insurance companies’ ability to bar people from getting coverage if they have “pre-existing conditions,” establish insurance cooperatives and put incentives in place to encourage employers to provide insurance.

The measure also includes significant new fees and taxes imposed on insurance companies, who stand to gain millions of new customers from the insurance mandate.

Mr. Baucus’ so-called “gang of six” worked for months to craft a plan, but no one else from the group of three Republicans and three Democrats stood alongside Mr. Baucus as he introduced the proposal, which will be the starting point for drafting sessions in the finance panel starting next week.

Mr. Baucus said he plans to continue to push for Republican support and predicted that he would get it and also pass a health overhaul through the Senate.

“This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long,” said Mr. Baucus, a Montana Democrat. “The Finance Committee has carefully worked through the details of health care reform to ensure this package works for patients, for health care providers and for our economy.”

Sens. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Michael B. Enzi of Wyoming, two Republicans in the gang of six, criticized Senate Democratic leaders and the White House for not giving the group enough time to continue negotiations.

“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 of affordable, accessible health coverage that we set forth when this process began,” Mr. Grassley said in a statement.

Mr. Grassley said he still has concerns that the bill would open the door to federal funding of abortions and coverage for illegal immigrants. He also said he wants alternatives to the mandate on individuals to obtain insurance and would like to see tougher medical malpractice reforms.

The third Republican in the group and the most likely Republican to back the plan, Sen. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, did not offer her support Wednesday but said she planned to continue negotiations.

Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the other Democrats in the group, praised the proposal’s release, but they also said they planned to offer amendments when the Finance Committee begins debating the legislation.

“While this is a very good start, it is not a finished product,” Mr. Conrad said. “That’s why it’s so important that we have an active amendment process both in committee and on the floor of the Senate.”

Mr. Baucus sliced Medicare costs, dumped some subsidies and increased fees to get a price tag less than $900 billion for the health care proposal he announced Wednesday a herculean effort that underscores the critical role cost will play if Democrats are going to succeed in overhauling health care.

Mr. Obama has pledged not to support a bill that isn’t fully paid for through cuts and tax increases, and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have said that’s the only kind of bill that would be acceptable to them. The Congressional Budget Office, the official scorekeeper for legislation, rushed out a preliminary estimate for the plan, to help the debate.

But Mr. Baucus’ scrimping wasn’t enough to allay congressional skeptics. Fiscal conservatives said his proposal still has too big a price tag. Liberal lawmakers, on the other hand, said the finance chairman needed to toss out too many important provisions, especially a government-sponsored public option and subsidies to help low-income individuals afford insurance, to keep costs down.

Story Continues →