Reid & Obama get their 60 votes, Bernie brought onboard for $250m in Medicaid funds for VT

Looks like its a done deal. Ben Nelson has agreed to a deal on restricting abortion access for women, and a deal whereby the feds cover medicaid spending in his state in perpetuity.

The other maybe-kinda-sorta-not-really holdout was our own Bernie Sanders, who was b(r)ought into the deal for the inclusion of a Patrick Leahy-promoted provision to increase Vermont's medicaid payments by a cool $250 million over the next six years. Breaks out, if divided evenly, to about $42 million a year. Given the looming budget hole, which could be $90 to $110 million, that's a big, big boost 

But given how scary this bill has the potential to be, is that a good deal for Vermont, or does it amount to thirty pieces of silver? And please don't try and tell me its getting any better in conference. Not with the White House pushing so hard for this very result.

I'll be the first to admit, my own reaction against the bill assumes some worst-case-scenario projections based on what the bill does – and doesn't – do. But given that the feds take virtually no responsibility for cost control and throws open the regulatory doors, its the insurance and pharmaceutical industries that are solely responsible for delivering the health care scenario, worst-case or otherwise.

You see my hesitation. This could all amount to one seriously ugly “I told you so” from the left. 

What do you folks think? 

ALSO: A big priority of Bernie's – increased investment in Community Health Centers – stayed ultmately intact. His website reports “$10 billion investment in community health centers, expected to go to $14 billion when Congress completes work on health care reform legislation, was included in a final series of changes to the Senate bill.” 

13 thoughts on “Reid & Obama get their 60 votes, Bernie brought onboard for $250m in Medicaid funds for VT

  1. It sounds like it may be a reasonable bill that adds some improvements, but it’s certainly not reform. Indeed, the underlying failed system remains in place, and the long term costs will continue to escalate. We do get a few positive things here (more people covered), but it would be a shame (and misrepresentation) if the leadership claims the task of reform was accomplished. That would give the public the incorrect sense things will improve, when that’s probably not the case at all. It would be better to call this a “patch” and that real reform must still be developed.

  2. but I’m not ready to fault Bernie for grabbing what he could for Vermont.  Seems to me that the business going forward will be to immediately begin building consensus for legislation to restrain the health insurers from skinning and gutting the American rate-payers.

  3. Mike Lux has a great commentary on this over Open Left:

    I find myself gripped in a bitter argument- with myself- about the fate of health care reform. It’s sort of like watching… Gollum in the Lord Of The Rings saga fight angrily with himself over how to deal with Frodo: “the master is so nice to me, he takes care of me and wants to help me” vs. “I will strangle him, I will crush his head against the rocks, I will feed him to the giant spider”. In my case, the raging fight with myself goes more like “But there are so many nice things in this bill, I really like a lot of it, and I’ve wanted this bill for such a long time” vs. “those evil insurers are screwing us again, I want to kill this bill, crush it against the rocks”.

  4. I have never heard anything that made any sense to me in the whole debate other than single payer.

    Its hard to understand the opposing politics here in Vermont when our congressmen are for real reform.

    But nationally there are many that don’t get it.  Until a large majority of people in the opposing states demand real reform, we won’t be able to fight off the special interests that are quite happy with the status quo and have the $$ to get their way.

    Its easy to just say no to this bill as Howard Dean suggested should happen.  However, we would have lost the good stuff in this bill, which is clearly as good as it can get in the current situation.

    But whatever happened to the “nuclear option” where the senate changes the rules to allow a simple majority vote?

    Some of the horse trading that occurred to get to 60 was incredibly un-democratic and the worst kind of sausage making.

    PJ

  5. meet the Lions…

    just can’t get away from that image… sorry.   although the budget plug on the Medi is attractive.  Wonder which campaign contributor Jim will find to dip a finger into it?

  6. … this Kos diary should be required reading …

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyo

    And read the whole thing. It’s long, but we reality-based liberals should be willing to entertain alternative points of view and give them careful consideration.

    Like Bernie, I believe the good in the likely bill that will come out of conference is worth passing. And I think the diary I’ve linked to helps explain why that is…

  7. have some maple syrup on your morning arsenic.

    Sanders sold out for a few pennies. He will now stay a loyal servant of the DC Dems surrender monkeys in chief (Reid and Obama).

  8. Howard Dean is right if you’re a purist:” don’t vote for this bill, but I accept that for Patrick and Bernie NOT to vote for the bill would be a low against Obama and at this point we can’t have that. But the bill is so bad that it adds impetus to our VT4Single Payer Network and Workers’ Center push in Vermont for us to enact a Single Payer bill in VT and show folks what we’re talking about. Bernie’s 30 minute video speaking about Single Payer insurance in the Senate — ELIMINATING Health Insurance companies altogether — was brilliant, and we have to keep working in VT for just such a plan. Some of our House & Senate leadership are mouthing off about how we can’t do it because of ERISA, but Catamount doesn’t have an ERISA waiver, nor do several other proposals. This is a bad argument, but they fall back on it helplessly as if there were an actual law against single payer. No waiver is necessary unless someone brings a test case (which they haven’t about Catamount — but then so few people actually can afford Catamount anyway), so it’s just being used as an excuse.

    PLEASE COME TO RALLY JAN. 6 AT NOON IN THE STATE HOUSE TO SUPPORT SINGLE PAYER IN VT

    PLEASE COME TO THE JOINT SENATE/HOUSE PUBLIC HEARINGS JAN. 12 6-9 pm AT THE STATE HOUSE TO DISCUSS S-88 AND H-100 – Single Payer legislation introduced last session.


    A, Raynolds

Comments are closed.