Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) Says 60 Votes Needed To Pass Healthcare, Reconciliation Won't Work!

[Better Believe It]

Has Kent Conrad Solved the Public Plan Problem?
An Interview.
Ezra Klein
Washington Post
June 11, 2009

KLEIN: How do you respond to someone who says, this is a terrific idea. More competition is always welcome. But why instead of a public option? Why not do it alongside and let a thousand coverage models bloom?

CONRAD: Votes. The problem is this. If you're in a 60 vote environment in the Senate, and I believe we are, because I believe reconciliation simply won't work, if you begin tallying up the votes, I believe that virtually all Republicans are against the public option and some democrats are. So how do you get to 60?

KLEIN: How many Democrats would you estimate are against a public option?

CONRAD: I don't know for certain, but I think at least three, and maybe more.

KLEIN: And why do you think that reconciliation won't work for health reform.

CONRAD: Reconciliation was never designed to write substantive legislation. It was designed solely for deficit reduction. The whole idea was you would change numbers, not policy. You would change numbers on the revenue side of the equation and the spending side of the equation.

And so, the way it works, under current rules, if your in reconciliation, you have to be deficit neutral over five years. Under the budget resolution, health care can be deficit neutral under 10 years. That's a big difference.

Two, under reconciliation, you're subjected to the Byrd rule. The Byrd rule says that anything that doesn't cost money or save money, or that only costs money or saves money in a way that's incidental to the policy, are subject to strike. The result, for instance, is that all the insurance market provisions are subject to strike. All the wellness and prevention provisions are subject to strike. The Senate parliamentarian said to us that if you try to write substantive health reform in reconciliation, you'll end up with Swiss cheese.

Read the complete interview at:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/has_kent_conrad_solved_the_pub.html?hpid=topnews

[babylonsister]

1. Funny, I think reconciliation will work just fine. nt

[andym]

2. If they can make the co-ops lead to a healthcare model like France's then they could be OK

If they can make the co-ops lead to a healthcare model like France's then it could be OK.

Here is from an old editorial:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/11/frances_model_healthcare_system/
....
Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37. The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.....

the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, Sécurité Sociale.

Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.

French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by Sécurité Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.

------
This is not a simplistic one-themed article, and definitely worth reading to help understand the compromises necessary to get something done in a country that emphasizes personal "choice" like the USA

[Better Believe It]

3. Don't worry. They won't do that. They hate France and anything French!

And they never had to "compete" with a private health insurance industry that covered over 200 million people.

Read the post about the co-op scam:

Robert Reich: Coops - The Latest Public Option Bamboozle, and How to Recognize the Real Thing

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8465301

[andym]

4. Never say never

The French model is one of the ways in which a compromise plan can be crafted that would actually overcome the Reich's objections. The key is to push for this as an alternative when lobbying congress. I'll make sure to describe it in my letters to the key players. Perhaps it might even inspire some of the principals (Baucus, Conrad etc).

Of course, when I write I first make it clear that a well-designed single payer system would be best. A strong public option would be good and then if anything else is tried, it has to have enough planning to insure everyone, provide "freedom", have the doctors in charge, and save money. One thing is certain: the current profit margins of the insurance companies will have to go-- one way or the other.

[EndElectoral]

5. I want it on record the names of those senators who voted against a public option!

[Better Believe It]

6. Is anyone in the Senate (besides Republicans) signing on to his b.s. that 60 votes are required?

Even without reconciliation only 51 Senate votes are required for passage. If the Republicans want to filibuster against a meaningful health care bill with a strong public option, let them!

All filibusters end.

Let them isolate themselves even more from the people.