January 4, 2010 11:11 AM

Health Care Progress Report: What's Next for the Bill?

By
Stephanie Condon
Topics
Health Care
Updated at 6:00 p.m. ET with information about House Democrats' upcoming meetings.

Editor's Note: CBSNews.com's weekly progress report on the health care bill will now be a part of Hotsheet. Click here for the previous edition..

Senate Democrats managed to pass a comprehensive health care bill with a dramatic Christmas Eve vote, but the work to get health care reform through Congress is far from over. In fact, Democrats may now face the most challenging part of the process, as they attempt to merge the Senate bill with the legislation passed in the House of Representatives.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

Congress has reached the fourth step of the health care reform legislative process, which CBSNews.com has been tracking for you with our Health Care Progress Report, shown below. However, given they have already missed their 2009 deadline to finish the bill, Democrats may reportedly skip the formal process of the fourth step -- the conference committee -- and rely on informal negotiations to get the job done expediently.

(CBS)


Formal Meeting or Backroom Negotiations?

Typically, to merge two different versions of a bill from the House and Senate, the Congress would appoint a "conference committee" to work out a compromise version. The Senate would have to take a series of votes to approve this process and select conferees, as explained in detail by David Waldman at Congress Matters.

But rather than subject the health care bill to more filibuster-prone votes, two senior Capitol Hill staffers say Democrats are "almost certain" to simply skip the formal negotiating process, reports Jonathan Cohn of the New Republic.

"It's time for a little ping-pong," one staffer reportedly said, referring to the process in which the House and the Senate "ping-pong" full bills back and forth to each other, until they have a bill both sides can agree on.

This game of ping pong, however, may not be so easy.

What Issues are On the Table?

At a constituent meeting on Sunday, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), one of the House leaders in the health care debate acknowledged Congress will skip the formal conference committee because it "would need 60 votes [in the Senate] all over again," reports Dave Dayen of FireDogLake. Yet Waxman reportedly said he would press the Senate and White House negotiators to accept the House terms on issues pertaining to prescription drug reform.

"The president and the Senate made very poor deals with PhRMA," Waxman reportedly said, referring to President Obama's deal with the pharmaceutical industry, limiting its contribution to reform to $80 billion.

"I have said that I am not bound by that agreement," he reportedly said, adding he would tell the president, "Are we interested in protecting the profits of the drug companies or protecting seniors?"

Waxman also reportedly said he had "serious doubts" the final product would include a government-run insurance option, mirroring remarks from other House Democrats who have suggested they could concede on the issue of the public option.

A host of other serious issues will have to be debated between the House and the Senate, including abortion restrictions, the extension of the Children's Health Insurance Program and whether to establish one national or state-based health insurance exchanges. They will discuss other big issues, like whether to pay for it with a surtax on wealthy Americans or a tax on high-end insurance policies.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will meet with Waxman and the other House leaders in charge of health care -- Reps. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) and George Miller (D-Calif.) -- Tuesday afternoon, CBS News Capitol Hill Producer Evelyn Thomas reports. On Thursday, the entire House Democratic caucus will meet, either in person or by phone for those currently outside of Washington, to discuss the legislation.

The Opposition Isn't Giving Up

Meanwhile, while Democrats could very well work out their differences, opponents of the plan have yet to give up their fight against it.

Even if the bill is ultimately signed by President Obama, some conservatives are prepared to take the matter up with the courts, the Washington Post reports, arguing that one of its fundamental components -- the individual mandate -- is unconstitutional.

Numerous Republican attorneys general are also threatening court cases, claiming elements of the bill are "constitutionally flawed."

Add a Comment See all 116 Comments
by zootsuithap January 5, 2010 11:05 AM EST
Obama = LIAR in Chief
Reply to this comment
by jimbom121 January 5, 2010 9:06 AM EST
In this case, I don;t think the GOP has anything to add. They have said all along that all they want to do is kill this bill. So they have taken themselves out of the equation.
Reply to this comment
by payasyougo January 5, 2010 7:50 AM EST
"Democrats may reportedly skip the formal process of the fourth step -- the conference committee -- and rely on informal negotiations to get the job done expediently"
-----

Because we all know that is how things work in DC. "Negotiations" are the most expedient way prostiticians can accomplish a task that would never otherwise see the light of day.

Our founding fathers loathed such a government.
Reply to this comment
by ffoulkes-2009 January 5, 2010 7:51 AM EST
Not only that, but it is a sure way of keeping the final bill away from the public until it is voted on.
by nojoy01 January 5, 2010 7:29 AM EST
by formrusmcsgt January 4, 2010 10:58 PM EST

I hope what's next is an assessing of the obese their fair share of the 28 billion their wide bodies cost us every year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, so let's have the "fat police" & the "smoking cops" & the "drunk detectives" & don't forget the sexually promiscuous "gendarmes". Or perhaps we can lump all of these & other health risking behaviors under the all inclusive umbrella of the "healthy lifestyle gestapo". Let's charge everybody for anything that may cause health care dollars to be spent but we will have to have an enforcement arm to ferret out the secret risk takers. Why pick on just one group, fat people, when there are so many groups that waste health care dollars by indulging in risky behavior/lifestyle. Sarcasm this early is not good for me, I need a cup of coffee. No, wait, that's not good for me & could get me fined or cause my premiums to go up. And I think both sarcasm and coffee qualify as "not being good for you" and thus possibly costing health care dollars. (sarcasm can lead to broken noses, bones, etc)
Reply to this comment
by zootsuithap January 5, 2010 11:04 AM EST
I don't see anything wrong in anything you proposed....
by RobAla January 5, 2010 6:34 AM EST
However they work this bill, the process has been anything but "transparent" (as promised). On top of that, every poll indicates that the bills in Washington are not they type of health care reform the majority of Americans want.

PollDateSampleFor/Favor Against/Oppose SpreadRCP Average12/8 - 1/3--38.650.7Against/Oppose +12.1
Rasmussen Reports1/3 - 1/31000 LV4252Against/Oppose +10Quinnipiac12/15 - 12/201616 RV3653Against/Oppose +17
CNN/Opinion Research12/16 - 12/201160 A4256Against/Oppose +14
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl12/11 - 12/141008 A3247Against/Oppose +15
Associated Press/GfK12/10 - 12/141001 A3644Against/Oppose +8
Gallup12/11 - 12/131025 A4648Against/Oppose +2
ABC News/Wash Post12/10 - 12/131003 A4451Against/Oppose +7
Pew Research12/9 - 12/131504 A3548Against/Oppose +13
FOX News12/8 - 12/9900 RV3457Against/Oppose +23

These huge bills written in legalize, should have been addressed openly and written in easily understandable terms. Think of the nightmare hospitals and doctors will have in implementing these changes! Instead of reducing the costs of health care, these two groups may have to pass on the costs of hiring lawyers to decipher the actual meanings of these ridiculous bills. Instead of reducing the costs of health care, these bills include massive taxes and fees on insurance companies (who will pass those costs on to us), taxes and fees on the makers of medical devices (who will pass the costs on to us) and directly on individuals. They should have addressed the main concerns of the American people in separate specific bills, written plainly, and done openly. Polls show this is not the health care reform wanted by the majority of Americans.
Reply to this comment
by velma179 January 5, 2010 10:50 AM EST
by RobAla January 5, 2010 6:34 AM EST

"These huge bills written in [legalize]..." [correct word: legalese]

*************

Rob, ALL legislation is written in the language of law. Why? Because the purpose of legislation is to MAKE LAW!

Have you even read the Constitution? It is written in the exact same manner.

The USA is not a pure democracy, meaning the people can not make law directly -- such as by proposition or referendum, which some states use (and since I live in one state that faces many problems because of it, I'll tell you the process is NOT ideal by a large measure).

We are a representative Republic. The job of the people is to vote and then when they have chosen their Reps (each person gets FOUR votes nationally; one for Pres/VP, two for Senator and one for House District Rep)-- the people are responsible to communicate their views etc. to the one that is representing them "at the table".

Writing letters is best, e-mail and phone calls also work. Polls are the least effective way to communicate. Polling questions are not usually widely revealed (if at all) and wording does matter! Also Reps understand, in the case of health care legislation, for sure -- there are concerns from the entire spectrum of political party/ideology, etc.
Someone like you may see poll results and say -- oh that means the people don't like this because ... and then fill in your own opinion.

But many people are opposed to the legislation as it stands now because things are not included (i.e. the public option) that you would likely NOT want in the bill.

So, don't count on the OPINION polling to impact the passage. Of course do continue to contact YOUR Reps -- that is your right and responsibility as an American.


PS -- health care entities already have many lawyers on staff.

PPS -- insurance companies will be blocked from raising costs due to the imposed taxes and fees... though the "teeth" of this action is removed when the public option is dropped. I would guess you were not for that component of reform... well, thanks for costing the rest of us our hard earned money by willfully refusing to comprehend one of the first tenets of capitalism -- competition!
by Amazingoly January 5, 2010 6:29 AM EST
Sounds like the Democrats will try to use duct tape and rubber bands to piece the flawed bill together in secret again, leaving the Republicans out again. Many would hope that there will be outrage from within their ranks because they are left out also. Americans do not approve of the way this flawed bill has been tangled together behind the closed door meetings. This is not even reform, and is unconstitutional, and will be severely challenged.
Reply to this comment
by zootsuithap January 5, 2010 11:05 AM EST
This is from a foxnews post:
"That's what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are," Obama said at a debate against Hillary Clinton in Los Angeles on Jan. 31, 2008.
by ministry_of_truth January 5, 2010 6:00 AM EST
I have read where this will be in private and not on CSPAN.

Can someone please tell me where the HOPE and CHANGE have gone.

This is not what we were promissed.
Reply to this comment
by slownewsday___ January 5, 2010 2:13 AM EST
" by ffoulkes-2009 January 5, 2010 1:41 AM EST
Slow, If you don't like living in a 'socialized' society, why the heck do you want to make it MORE so?"


I don't. But considering the reality of the situation, I'd prefer to see the government not be allowed to borrow, and actually allocate the money in useful areas.

You probably supported and support the war in Iraq, and don't see your own hypocrisy, do you? Pre-emptive strikes aren't in the Constitution - simply defense.

But I'm sure you'll have some smartasss response, regardless.
Reply to this comment
by ffoulkes-2009 January 5, 2010 2:20 AM EST
I did not support the war, but do think we need to win and clean up the mess before leaving. We also must support our troops...got a problem with that?

smartassss
by slownewsday___ January 5, 2010 2:25 AM EST
There's a big difference between supporting our troops and wasting money in an indefinite war. I don't think you're actually fiscally conservative.
by rightbehind January 5, 2010 1:08 AM EST
I want the democrats to run single payer candidates in 2010. We need to get rid of more republicrats and republicans.
Reply to this comment
by Idntv January 5, 2010 4:20 AM EST
I do not want more DemoCritics deciding how to spend what money I will have left after this deboncale..
by ALBrainTrust10 January 5, 2010 12:12 AM EST
WHAT'S NEXT? THE DEMS WILL MEET AMONGST ONLY THEMSELVES TO FINALIZE THE DEMISE OF THE US HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

MAYBE BEN NELSON WILL HOLD THE LINE?
Reply to this comment
See all 116 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook