After much delay, Baucus unveils healthcare plan

September 16, 2009

After weeks of delay as he negotiated for Republican support, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus Wednesday unveiled a 10-year, $856 billion plan to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.

The measure still has no promise of Republican support, even though Baucus dumped the public insurance option favored by most Democrats and agreed to other Republican changes in hopes of producing a bipartisan plan.

SENATE/HEALTHCAREBaucus predicted it would ultimately garner Republican votes.

“This is a good bill. This is a balanced bill. It can pass the Senate,” he said.

“It is fiscally responsible,” he added. “It reduces the deficit in 10 years. And it controls healthcare spending in the long run.”

Early reaction was not great. headlined it “Baucus Bill Bust” because of the lack of Republican support. Consumer Watchdog charged it would force middle class families to pay 20 percent of their incomes on healthcare.

Julius Hobson, a policy adviser at the Bryan Cave law firm, noted it “not only lacks Republican support but it is not clear if it even has ‘full’ Democratic support.”

But the Blue Dog coalition — an important grouping of fiscally conservative congressional Democrats — praised the measure as “an important step forward” because it would not add to the federal deficit and would take steps to reduce long-term healthcare costs.

“Meeting these standards, also set forth by the president, is critical to reining in deficits and protecting our economy for future generations of Americans,” Representative Stephanie Herseth said in a statement on behalf of the Blue Dogs.

The Baucus plan would require all U.S. citizens and legal residents to have health insurance.

Subsidies would be provided on a sliding scale to help low-income people purchase insurance. Some 46 million people in the United States have no health insurance coverage.

Under the program envisioned by President Barack Obama, people who do not have insurance through their employers could purchase a plan through an insurance exchange.

The insurance exchange would include plans by private insurers as well as a public insurance option. Obama argues a public plan is needed to provide effective competition to drive down costs. Opponents fear it would drive private insurers out of the market.

The public insurance option has been strongly opposed by Republicans. Hoping to circumvent opposition, the Baucus plan proposes the creation of non-profit cooperatives to offer insurance in competition with private insurers.

In a speech to Congress recently, Obama said he favored a public option. But he urged liberal Democrats to be open to other ideas, like cooperatives, that could achieve the same goal of improving competition.

A pdf of the plan, the “America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009″ is available here.

What do you think?

Does it have broader appeal than the Democratic measures already introduced in the House and Senate? Or does it still contain elements that will generate wide opposition?

For more Reuters political news, click here.

Photo credit: Reuters/Jim Young (Baucus after a healthcare meeting on Tuesday)


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

The GOP will not vote for this anyway, so why cave on the public option?
It might be more useful to have a public option and non-profit cooperatives. The latter could be useful, but they will not be operated under uniform practices and will eventually contribute to more inequalities. They may even be co-opted by the same bad actors running the insurance industry.
Second, since Federal employee insurance pays for abortions, where do some of these blue-dogs come off saying that the public options or co-ops should not. Last I looked, it was still legal, and the GUYS who don’t want to pay for it haven’t needed it.

Posted by E | Report as abusive

This bill is designed to benefit insurance companies, not individuals. Coops will not have enough clout to significantly lower health care costs. We would need a national public option to do that. I’m tired of our government protecting big business and ignoring the needs of it’s people.

Posted by Reuben | Report as abusive

Government should not be in our health care. What they have the power to do and refuse is to limit litigation against porviders, doctors, and hospitals. Sit on the trial lawyers and watch the prices trouble down.

Obama does not get it. Stay out of our lives.

I will no vote for anyone currently in the congress or the white house.

Posted by John Hennessey | Report as abusive

So if we are guaranteed zero Republican support on a compromise bill, then why bother?

Just draft the version most Americans want (and gave you a Congressional majority to do so) and put the public option back in.

Posted by Pipemajor | Report as abusive

We won’t be able to pay for it. I haven’t read it, but the report sounds like everyone’s taxes and premiums will go sky high. It won’t pass because too many of its proponents want to be re-elected in 2010.

Posted by harkinspatterson | Report as abusive

It still lacks the most important provision. To allow health insurance providers to compete in every state. Nothing can increase cost containment better then competition.

Posted by jeff roundy | Report as abusive

While we ponder, people perish. Can’t we do even one thing that is selfless and only takes into account the needs of the people? This is America! We talk a lot about our generosity and our uprightness, but I’m not seeing it. Shame on our congressmen who put regaining their seats over the health and future of this nation.

Posted by Wanda | Report as abusive

I am dissapointed. Media had exposed Max Baucus as a insurance industry lacky and it has come true. Co-ops are a ineffective means at providing strong and effective patient health coverage. I, as well as other, will unfortunately notify the President and our representatives and Senators to vote against this. The media and GOP will paint this as Americans really don’t want the type of healthcare reform the President has propose and that is not true. We want a Public Plan that covers all citizens of the US, a wellness model not a sick model of medical care and we are willing to united against the special interest insurance companies that rip us off.

Posted by Ray Bieri | Report as abusive

We need leaders not the Obama followers Obama has not shown that he can lead Obama is a cheerleader give him the dress & pompoms, healthcare is should be between the doctor and the patent if the “Gongress” could get out of the way the cost would come down and more people would pay it but this is not about helping people get insurc=ance it’s about growing government

Posted by Pete | Report as abusive

What does it say about the state of our government, when the Senator who gets the most money from insurance companies and providers is writing the healthcare bill.
He is definitely not on the side of the people. (But we are supposed to believe that their giant contribution have no influence on his actions). Right

Public Option is the only hope of competition to benefit all consumers.

Stay mad.

Posted by Terry Glaser-Needell | Report as abusive

Why do we even pay any attention to a Senator who represents very few and very conservative people dicatate to us the future of our nation’s healthcare? Senator Baucus and his committee represent the Drug Companies, the Republican Party and others who’s only concern it to maintain the status quo. Forget them and pass a long overdue bills that will bring the US to the standards of health care long existing in Canada, France, Germany Sweden etc.

Posted by Dan Hollander | Report as abusive

regardless of the bill the opposition party and right wing conservatives do not want change period. They would rather continue to complain and moan like they did for the last 50 years about changing health care. What needs to be looked at, is why it costs so much for simple procedures and drugs when you are in the hospital. How can we get free antibiotics but have to pay extremely high prices other necessary drugs. There are changes that need to be made, this congress should dam the torpodeos and “FULL STEAM AHEAD”

Posted by Joe | Report as abusive

This is the long awaited bipartisan plan? It looks to be like a typical Democrat proposal — new fees and taxes, mandates, and another $1 trillion in government spending? Don’t be duped by replacing the public option with cooperatives. These cooperatives, which don’t now exist on the scale sought by Democrats, would received federal government seed money and their rules would be determined by the feds.

It is clear that the Democratic leadership wants to control the health care industry, and among its goals is the eventual elimination of private industry from the health insurance sector.

Among the plans in the Baucus proposal is new fees and taxes for private insurance companies, to help fund the costs to pay for healthcare insurance for those currently uninsured.

None of the Democrats’ plans would improve the quality of health care, nor reduce the cost to those paying for health insurance. Instead, the plan is another social welfare program, in which those paying the bills will be forced to pay for another “entitlement program” in which the ever-demanding recipients get something for nothing.

The Obama administration says healthcare reform is essential to save the U.S. economy, even though the Congressional Budget Office says it will increase government spending by about $1 trillion (although the great Baucus plan has estimates under $900 billion).
Although the government says the health reforms will not program insurance for illegal aliens, it resists any attempts to require proper identification, even as estimates are that illegal aliens receiving health care in the U.S. already costs over $10 billion annually. Obama insists that his plan would not provide health insurance for illegal aliens. Technically, that is correct; but, it doesn’t reveal the true picture. Illegal aliens, desiring health care, don’t pay insurance premiums, or even bother having health insurance. They simply go to the hospital and get treated, and pay nothing. Of course, those costs are absorbed by hospitals, which pass on the costs for those who do pay their bills. Meanwhile, Obama is planning immigration reform, i.e. amnesty for illegal aliens, including his aunt, and says of the cost for medical care treatment currently being spent on illegal aliens, that providing such care is a matter of decency.

Much of the rhetoric about the need for healthcare reform centers around the uninsured. But, little mention is made about the fact that about a fourth of all uninsured U.S. residents are illegal aliens. Their financial drain on the health industry is multiplied by the fact that their children —- if born in the U.S. — are citizens. Let’s be honest, if the U.S. is going to have open borders and feed/house/educate/medically treat anyone on this planet who wishes to come here, it is going to be a huge financial burden, and will bankrupt the country. Free health care will be yet another incentive to attract still more illegal aliens, even as the accelerating loss of manufacturing jobs makes it increasingly difficult for the economy to assimilate those already here.

The Obama administration gives lip service to bipartisanship. What it really means is Obama wants participation only from those who agree with him. Or put more simply, Obama’s idea of bipartisanship is: let’s everybody do as I say. If you don’t agree with the liberals that are running the government, and negotiating deals excluding the other party, you will be labeled as an obstructionist, and the Obama-led government will do what it wants.

Gary Clouser

Those without health insurance could receive subsidies. —- ie…taxpayer money — to pay for How is that any different than

Posted by Gary Clouser | Report as abusive

Throw the entire plan out and leave us alone. If I were under the OBAMA plan I’d be dead since I’m 74 and went through three cancer treataments. Set your priorities and pay down the deficit and bring our young men home from Iraq and Afganistan. If they don’t want to defend their own homeland, then why should we. And Congressmen, stop with the Pork Projects. Protect a Mouse in California for Nancy Palosi???

Posted by Lea | Report as abusive

Down with government run healthcare in any form. Down Down Down! Washington is corrupt and America cannot pay it’s bills. Washington is CORRUPT people. DIRTY and CORRUPT. Do not put public healthcare in a corrupt politicians hands!!!! Do not! The government has it’s hands in far too much of our business as it is! Wise up folks. This is the United States of America! Let your representative know your tired of a corrupt Washington! Time to put the brakes on everything and get our house in order! Enough is enough!

Posted by jason | Report as abusive

NO! It’s a mess of a plan. Without a strong public option, one with teeth and sway, it’s worse than meaningless and will amount to being a subsidy to the health insurance industry!

Corruption IS rampant.

Posted by mimi | Report as abusive

The way I understand this if a person does not have health Insurance the bill would put fines on them ? Duu if you can’t afford to buy insurance how would you pay fines !

Posted by Richard Capehart | Report as abusive

“It is fiscally responsible,” he added. “It reduces the deficit in 10 years. And it controls healthcare spending in the long run.”

Fiscally responsible? The Federal government? What an absolute joke. We are $12 trillion in debt! And this guy says it will control healthcare spending? Insanity of the first degree. Government needs to get out of all health care with the exception of V.A. hospitals. – let’s get our country back!

Posted by DennisR | Report as abusive


You said,

“While we ponder, people perish. Can’t we do even one thing that is selfless and only takes into account the needs of the people? This is America! We talk a lot about our generosity and our uprightness, but I’m not seeing it. Shame on our congressmen who put regaining their seats over the health and future of this nation.”

Why do you need government to provide generosity and uprightness? That should be your personal, individual responsibility – not government’s. Shame on you for thinking government – not you – should do this.

Posted by DennisR | Report as abusive


Posted by ROGER | Report as abusive

We must fight for public option. GOP and their insurance company backers/lobbyists are doing all they can to water down this bill, then won’t vote for it. Public option is the only way to keep the insurance companies honest.

Posted by Reza | Report as abusive

The plan looks good but what is hidden in it is a trap for young people. The plan says they will fine anyone who is not going to buy health insurance. Look people in the age group of 25 to 35 won’t get sick often so they don’t need a regularly paying health care plan. Paying into it is like throwing oneself into a blackhole. They can save this money. The math is simple. If you have a health plan for which you pay $120/month for a year it is $1440, in a year if you are having a private visit to the doctor for seasonal flu. $300 plus medication, still you will be saving about $1000 a year. In 10 years this will add up to $10000. This is a figure that this health care plan is aiming at. I am a liberal but that doesn’t mean we should allow this kinda public looting of young people. Remove this provision from the plan. I am for it.

Posted by LonelyPoet | Report as abusive

Forget about trying to pass this flawed watered down bill. Pandering to interest groups who won’t vote anyway was a dumb move. So we’re stuck with a Senate version without much real substance that will make this D.O.A. for passage.
The House version is a much better bill and that’s the one we should be pushing for passage of.

Posted by mike | Report as abusive

The Baucus proposal is the same old junk-clunker with a new paint job. This will REQUIRE EVERYONE, including young people with few or no health problems to purchase unwanted/un-needed health care insurance or face fines starting at $980.00 and going up from there. Additionally there will be $350 Billion in new taxes on middle class Americans (what’s that? But he said “not one penny in increased taxes…”). This administration ran their campaign on the fact that so many people who went to government run schools are really bad at math.

Posted by d forman | Report as abusive

To be honest, many people that oppose an overhaul of healthcare have never been without. I have been one of “those” people without and let me tell you it’s not a good place to be. Imagine having just graduated from college and in the pursuit of a graduate degree to find out that you have pre-cervical cancer. It’s not a pretty sight. I may not have the answers, but for people that say we are paying for illegals and others, guess what you are already paying for it roughly $350 per year. So rather than fight about a Republican or Democratic based plan, let’s get a plan in action. There are people dying and we are arguing about the inevitable, that healthcare must be readily available for all. We are citizens of the SAME United States of America and it is utterly ridiculous that contries all over the world get it and we don’t. In order for us as a nation to prosper, we must take care of the least of our members. In case you haven’t seen this or felt this, our country has been in a deficit for the past 9 years and this is not something that the Obama administration has fostered. So get over it people and let’s get this country back on track. Also just a thought, look at who’s getting the most backing from Healthcare lobbyist and see if these are the same people going again the reform.

So my final thought, full steam ahead even if the Republicans dont agree with the Democrats. Many people are dying over this mess. Insurance coverage for all, we are human and deserve this at least.

Posted by KP | Report as abusive

{Baucus: “This is a good bill. This is a balanced bill. It can pass the Senate,” he said.

“It is fiscally responsible,” he added.}

Lopping $250B off the Defense budget would be “fiscally responsible” as well, especially if it helped expand Health Care coverage in America.

Why weren’t these Senatorial nerds talking about Fiscal Responsibility when Lead-head-in-Chief was pouring $1T looking for WMDs over in the Iraqi sandbox?

This bill is not even 1/10th of the nation needs to get to a World Class level of decent Health Care.

Posted by Lafayette | Report as abusive

Bill gives huge powers to Sebelius to form committees and spend money. Extends current test plans. Huge amount of money spent on analyzing “medical workforce”. Don’t see how this bill can possibly reduce spending, or the deficit.

Why not give 10 million uninsured people $15,000 a year in vouchers or tax credits and let them go buy insurance? Hospital bills will get paid, insurance companies can compete for the business, and it will cost $15 billion a year, instead of the ridiculous numbers that Congress is talking about. It’s only $856 billion, and that’s much better than $1.5 trillion! Yeah, but it’s still $856 billion.

So I suppose the dems could have campaigned on a combination of the stimulus and healthcare creating $1.5 trillion combined of new spending? Now that’s change we can beleive in!

Posted by Joey | Report as abusive

yeah, the U.S. government is SO EFFICIENT at everything it does. Medicare is already 20x over its budget from when it was first introduced in the 60s.

Nationalized healthcare will not only force back alley births (to semi-quote Ted Kennedy) but will bankrupt the country. Folks – Marxism doesn’t work. Ask Cuba, Soviet Union, North Korea, Venezuela, …

Posted by Richie Rich | Report as abusive

Please Mr. Baucus, Pass something now, almost anything will do just don’t let the wackos rule the day. We need health insurance reform NOW!

Posted by SWilliams | Report as abusive

After laboring to bring forth a whale, he gave birth to a minnow.

Posted by John Durand | Report as abusive

Baucus stinks. The notion of mandating insurance without a public option to hold down costs is a joke, but not as bad a joke as state co-ops, which won’t have nearly enough members to compete for discounts against the insurance companies. A NATIONAL co-op would be a different story. State co-ops will go broke shortly after they’re instituted. Look at Massacheusetts.

Posted by Marvin8 | Report as abusive

It is discouraging to know the GOP will do whatever is necessary to protect the income of insurance companies, instead of the health of American people, as they should.

Posted by Guadalupe | Report as abusive

I like it! All it needs is a public option added and it is good to go!

Posted by Chris | Report as abusive

When Medicare was created, it was designed to stimulate competition in the insurance industry for those offering plans to those 65 and older. Do you see any competition in the market of being the primary insurer for those 65 and older? No, Medicare replaced all of them. Why pay twice, once for Medicaid during your working years, and then pay again for insurance when you are retired.

The same will happen with a public option. Instead of having to negotiate and administrate employee health care, companies will simply pay the fee and let the government administrate its employee health care. Why pay twice, once to pay your taxes and again to pay for insurance.

But just wait until you need an experimental procedure (currently not covered by Medicaid and Medicare) to save your life and see if a public plan pays for it. Trading cost containment for innovation in health care.

Posted by Scott | Report as abusive

I think this is deform not reform. The main losers are uninsured lower-middle income families that now have to pay $13,000 (today’s papers) for decent insurance or $6,000 for high deductible insurance that won’t cover initial medical expenses. I thought this bill was supposed to help them. The winners are the insurance companies with the government mandating everyone to come under their realm, without much enforcement of new rules and regulations. I heard their stock is increasing and that says it all. Carolyn Winter

Posted by Carolyn Winter | Report as abusive

Let’s get one thing straight. 45 million uninsured americans. First off its a huge overestimate. take out at least 10 million for illegals, which currently aren’t denied ER care as well they shouldnt be denied it, nobody should be denied ER coverage but thats not my point. now our 45 million uninsured is 35 million. now subtract 15 million. That 15 million is those who could be insured but choose not to, like 20 somethings in generally good health. and now we get our real number. the only number that really matters in this debate. and that is about 20 million UNINSURABLE. not uninsured. uninsurable. and based on our nations Obesity epidemic, about only 12 million would be uninsurable if we did something about obesity. why don’t we do something about that, along with tort and litigation reform.

Posted by Andrew | Report as abusive

Baucus has proven to be an insurance lobby man. He is not a real democrat and has insulted us all
His bill needs to be buried and forgotten.
He needs to be replaced.

I am disgusted

Posted by CT | Report as abusive

We really need a plan with a public option. Having lived in Japan and looked at the statistics of various countries that have a single-payer system, it just makes sense. Why would traditionally conservative doctors who are on the frontlines be 59% in favor of universal health care? What scares me is how rabid the opposition is to even a small step forward toward this. Being a Christian, it bothers me that some flaunt their faith in opposing reform as if Jesus would quash healthcare for those who can’t afford it. One coworker showed me a few large lumps that he had in various places that he said he couldn’t have checked until he found a job with decent insurance that didn’t have pre-existing clauses. Is this the best a ‘civilized’ nation can do for its people? Let’s press forward.

Posted by Willy Spring | Report as abusive

Health care reform in part must be health insurance reform. I will adhere to only to this aspect of the debate. The for-profit and “non-for profit” Blue Crosses are overwhelminging netting huge profits by raising patient premiums and underpaying physicians in many states simply because they can. One clear ramification of this is that physicians, especially amongst the family practicioners, are forced to see a greater number of patients per day in order to keep up with their ever increasing overhead expenses (Which includes medical insurance for their staff.) Clearly this leads to less time for interaction and intervention with patient which diminishes the Quality of ones health and care that you pay more for annually. How much can one’s physician help you in a 5-10 minute visit.

As far as creating a new nonprofit model, why don’t we start with the last one created by the government- BLUE CROSS. This non profit group was created by the government about 50 years ago for the citizens of each state as a more competitive/affordable option to the existing for-profits at that time. The Blues exist in every state of the Union.Unfortunately, over the decades our state congresses have generally failed to regulate them. Though they do not sell public shares or have stock holders interest to accomodate, the BLUES do Profit immensley with TENS OF BILLIONS in profit in many states. This far exceeds customary insurance asset holding guidelines.( Please note, their books may not be quite a rosey as that currently, but that is predominately because their investment of all that money that they should not have has plummeted as has yours.) They continue to raise premiums to you and your employers annually, to the tune of 16 to 30% last year alone in my state.On the physician side it is not uncommon for the BLUES to institute physician fee cuts in the name of keeping your premiums down if they find that one of the for-profits imposes a local fee cut.

So what is Blue Cross today? What is its mission other than to profit? Why does not anyone answer why the Blues not return to there original mission? Why can’t they be our REGULATED NON-PROFIT created by our government that exist already across America? I fear insurance lobbyist money talks louder than the public voice. Contact your legislators while you may have their ears. Otherwise your taxes will rise to fund and option not available to you, while potentially creating another stepping stone toward a national health care package you may not want. Simultaneously, your health insurance premiums will rise alarmingly in the name of insurance company profits. Realize they are only money managers they do not advance the service of medicine. They create no disease combating drugs. They do not refine surgical procedures. They do not research the cause and cure of our ills. They take more of your money and do everything they can not to spend it on you.

Posted by MD | Report as abusive

Im confussed about some of it who pays for the child untill 26 the parents?
So nothing changes for thoose of retirement age on medicare as of now what happens to the rest of us?
The wording in these Bills leaves you a wreck!

Posted by Toni | Report as abusive

It’s hard to believe that this is really the 21st Century and what we call the greatest democracy in the modern world doesn’t provide medical treatment for its citizens. It is shameful! Healthcare is not a luxury. It is a necessity! People don’t chose to get sick or hurt. Some of us are unfortunate and if we can’t afford to fill the pockets of insurance companies we suffer horrible consequences including financial disaster. All along insurance companies make billions off the backs of hard-working Americans. Wake up! We need to change this crime now!

Posted by John P | Report as abusive

Terrible plan….we need a combo of public option and single payer plans. Mr. Baucus is listening only to the insurance companies. He keeps hoping Republicans will join him. They won’t. Republicans don’t want any changes to the current health care plans.

Posted by Mike Sharpe | Report as abusive

Wealthcare for Billionaires!
Taxing individuals thousands of dollars out of their paychecks aside from premiums, plus requiring participation or else, AND leaving out the public option? Nice recipe for delivering billions to the insurance companies. Good work there, Mr. Baucus. I’m sure since we all love having insurance companies managing our health, we’ll just love your plan.

Posted by E Barrett | Report as abusive

[…] to Baucus, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would cost a total of $774 billion) a “good” and “balanced bill” that “can pass the Senate,” it has been met with sharp criticism from both sides of the […]

Posted by The Waiting Room | GSA Schedule Services | Report as abusive

No one commenting on this article has a minuscule reality in relation to accurate figures of affected population and the population diversity in the economic stratum. Keep thinking and guessing in your own greedy or hate-filled interest. Bottom line is make it affordable for everyone and do not mess with my 600,000 dollar waiting room, I am privileged and happy to be part of this corporate benefit.

Posted by abraham | Report as abusive

Time is now for all americans to speak up against those who want to kill health care reform. Obama has the best opportunity to change a broken system. If Americans continue to allow the medical industry to rape its citizens, the consequences will be disastrous. Why does every other major country in the world have a universal health care system for its citizens, but the U.S. This goes against everthing this great nation has stood for over the years.

Posted by darfut | Report as abusive

Baucus is “bogus” and so are the rest of the Dems and Repb. who support heathcare takeover.

Posted by JCB | Report as abusive

Having experienced a “revenue-neutral” sales tax going into force which was supposed to lower hidden taxes while raising a new tax applied to goods & services taxes, all I and others saw were net increases in taxes leading to overall reduction of discretionary income.

I am sure the promise will be made that insurance premiums will be lowered. Well guess what, all we’ll see is static or raised insurance premiums plus taxes, fees, you name it whatever they call organized theft, to pay for everyone else’s insurance.

Good job and welcome to Sweden.

Write your Congressman, Senator, etc.

Posted by HeardThisTunePlayedB4 | Report as abusive

I we can have universal health care insurance in the greatest country on earth, then I also want universal food insurance, and universal housing insurance.

By gum if health care is a necessity then so is food and housing.


Posted by fred | Report as abusive

I am full of greed and hate, I write arguments against helping. I want to protect my self interest so I spew confusion everywhere. Guess who I am?

Posted by Raised inUK | Report as abusive

Senator Baucus, and the rest of the Senate Finance Committee, have managed to pen a health care reform bill that is completely devoid of any actual reform. It is a masterpiece of FAIL – and the SFC deserves nothing but scorn and ridicule over the bill.

We need a single payer system. What we have does not work. It can’t be fixed. It need to be replaced with a first-world health care system – not given a coat of spackle and a public relations campaign to con America into believing bullsh1t qualifies as reform.

Posted by AC | Report as abusive

I heartily admire Obama’s try to not be partisan but in this case I think parts of the GOP are so off the deep end that he needs to move forward while the time is ripe and put in place the best possible healthcare option. Once people get used to a system that is well-regulated and balances a private and public option, there’ll be enough popular support that it will not easily be undone. There are times for compromise and times to put forth what’s in the best interests of all and let the chips fall as may. I hope the ‘blue’ Democrats will have enough guts to go with what’s best.

Posted by W. Spring | Report as abusive

W Spring,you hit the nail on the head all the bills and mountain of paper have not been able to tie down what is the problem,and you did with two words WELL REGULATED,that,s it! the vast majority the American people know that with the government that is a total IMPOSSIBILITY.

Posted by brian lee | Report as abusive