Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterHEALTH CARE:
Landmark health bill passes House on close vote
House hands Obama hard-fought win on his top domestic issue
Sunday, Nov. 8, 2009 | 5:31 a.m.
WASHINGTON — The Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed landmark health care reform legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard won victory on his signature domestic priority.
Republicans were nearly unanimous in opposing the plan that would expand coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry.
The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress. Nevada's congressional delegation followed party lines, with Democrats Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley both voting yes and Republican Dean Heller opposing it.
A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi compared the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.
Obama, who went to Capitol Hill earlier on Saturday to lobby wavering Democrats, said in a statement after the vote, "I look forward to signing it into law by the end of the year."
"It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it," said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955.
But minority Republicans cataloged their objections across hours of debate on the 1,990-page, $1.2 trillion legislation.
"We are going to have a complete government takeover of our health care system faster than you can say, 'this is making me sick,'" said Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich.
In the run-up to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups.
The legislation would require most Americans to carry insurance and provide federal subsidies to those who otherwise could not afford it. Large companies would have to offer coverage to their employees. Both consumers and companies would be slapped with penalties if they defied the government's mandates.
Insurance industry practices such as denying coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions would be banned, and insurers would no longer be able to charge higher premiums on the basis of gender or medical history. The industry would also lose its exemption from federal antitrust restrictions on price fixing and market allocation.
At its core, the measure would create a federally regulated marketplace where consumers could shop for coverage. In the bill's most controversial provision, the government would sell insurance, although the Congressional Budget Office forecasts that premiums for it would be more expensive than for policies sold by private companies.
The bill drew the votes of 219 Democrats and Rep. Joseph Cao, a first-term Republican who holds an overwhelmingly Democratic seat in New Orleans. Opposed were 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats.
From the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada issued a statement saying, "We realize the strong will for reform that exists, and we are energized that we stand closer than ever to reforming our broken health insurance system."
To pay for the expansion of coverage, the bill cuts Medicare's projected spending by more than $400 billion over a decade. It also imposes a tax surcharge of 5.4 percent on income over $500,000 in the case of individuals and $1 million for families.
Discussion: 23 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Police: 3 arrested in officer’s death have gang ties
- Franchione potential early candidate for UNLV football post
- Big fight headed for a New Frontier?
- Las Vegas condo hotels remain a tough sell — just ask Trump
- $60 million to stabilize neighborhoods buys five homes
- Hotels rein in risque advertising campaigns
- LV companies in denial about problem gambling
- Funny Face: Carrot Top’s stage act a mask of contradictions
- Reserve Rebels didn’t have time to panic
- Hospital privacy leak could harm patients
Blogs
The Kats Report
For props, Lewis Black needs only his manic delivery and torrid material (1 Comment)
Elsewhere
Sands China raises $2.5 billion in Hong Kong IPO
Marquardt v. Sonnen scheduled for UFC 109
Bloggity, Bloggity, Bloggity
Will a fourth consecutive title by Jimmie Johnson be good or bad for NASCAR? (2 Comments)
Top Chef: Las Vegas
The Jet Stream: And then there were four
Top Chef Episode 12: On keeping it simple
Miech Again
Chilly start for Chace, but Stanback says he'll warm up (1 Comment)
- Live chat
- Tuesday, noon PST
- Chat with Krista Creelman
- Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question
Calendar »
- 21 Sat
- 22 Sun
- 23 Mon
- 24 Tue
- 25 Wed
-
UFC 106 at Mandalay Bay Events Center
Mandalay Bay Events Center | 7 p.m. to 11 p.m.
-
Julio Iglesias at the Las Vegas Hilton
Las Vegas Hilton
-
Natasha Wicks hosts at Hawaiian Tropic Zone
Hawaiian Tropic Zone | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Tito Ortiz hosts at Tao
Tao | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Hiroshima at Santa Fe Station
Santa Fe Station
-
Frank Mir hosts at LAX
LAX Nightclub | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
The Four Tops at The Orleans Showroom
Orleans Hotel-Casino
-
Amir Sadollah hosts at Prive
Prive | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
I look forward to the day when all the people who want this react when in an effort to contain costs the government institutes a "social achievement" number and being the slackers they are they are among the lowest rung. As a result even emergency care will be denied to them. In that moment, a moment of realization, they will realize that they can freaking rot in Hell for all the sympathy they will get.
I look forward to the day when the government cuts R&D in new drugs as a way to cut costs and the same whiners wanting "the public option" never are treated by the medical advances which are never created.
I look forward to the great gnashing of teeth from the "public option supports" when waiting lists lengthen for procedures we take for granted.
I look forward to the demonization of employers who, in a cost saving move, dump their self coverage plans, pay a fine (which is cheaper than the coverage they currently provide), and dump their employees on the government. If we like our coverage we can keep it right? Not if the providers no longer provide it since mommy government is going to take care of us, right?
Congrats you freaking slackers, too lazy to look after your own health care; relying on mommy government to take care of your sniffles. Rot in hell.
I just heard there's a hefty fine and imprisonment for anyone who does NOT sign up for this insurance. Can anyone else confirm that with a link?
At almost 2,000 pages, I've got to wonder if anyone who voted for it actually read more than a summary.
KillerB, *OF COURSE* all our fine representatives read the bill in the 72 hours that the Speaker said the bill would be available prior to the vote. Oh, it wasn't available? Bah! No matter, it is for our own good dontcha know.
Hmmm I know, let's all turn over all our assets to the government and let them take care of all our medical, housing, food, and entertainment needs. Let's give all to the state. The State is Mother, the State is Father.
Also KillerB, the penalty you are looking for is on page 297 titled "Sec. 59B Taxation on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Coverage." The first .pdf I could find is at http://media.kansascity.com/smedia/2009/...
Also here is another wonderful set of gems.
http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1556...
"Would I have to have health insurance?
Yes, or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of your income. Hardship and religious waivers would be available, and some very low-wage earners would be exempt. The requirement would begin in 2013.
People who don't get insurance and don't pay the penalty face fines and possibly jail time.
Would my employer have to provide it?
Yes, or pay a penalty of 8 percent of payroll. Companies with payrolls under $500,000 would be exempt. Companies would have to pay 72.5 percent of the cost of the premium for a single worker and 65 percent of premium costs for a family policy, and small companies could get tax credits to help pay their costs.
Could I keep my current insurance?
Probably, at least for a while. Your employer could always change your carrier, <b>and it's possible employers might decide it's cheaper to pay the 8 percent penalty and drop coverage for workers, forcing you to buy coverage elsewhere.</b>
It's also possible your coverage won't meet standards for a basic policy, and would have to be changed when the bill is fully implemented."
Thanx, Cannon_A -- at first skim, what a mess, and with far-reaching consequences. Whoever put this together either didn't think it through or the hidden agenda behind it will mop up whatever destruction the rest of this administration's grand plans misses.
In my opinion employers should not be involved in providing health insurance to their employees. Individuals should purchase it directly from providers, whether it be from private insurers or the government doesn't matter much to me. The whole concept that employers be involved in health insurance never made sense to me because there is no logical link between the two. All the current system does is make it that much more difficult for employees to maintain coverage when they get a different job. Furhermore, it is inherently unfair that one employee with a spouse and children gets a greater benefit than another employee who has no dependents. Get employers out of the health insurance equation altogether.
Goodbye Libs who voted for this garbage bill!
Taxes will take affect right now! Health care three years later. Only good thing is the libs consider tampax a medical device and subject to more taxation. So every time you lib women use that tube, think of obama and pelosi!
Did some digging, and it's far from pretty:
The version of the HR 3692 Cannon_Asesrb posted is NOT the version Congress voted on, nothing negative to be inferred to that poster. Rather the version before Congress is much more a thing to be feared, shunned and beaten down.
Check out this press release -- "PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail / JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats' Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail" _ http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.go...
From the New American -- "Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is prepared to jail any American who does not buy a qualifying health insurance plan if the healthcare bill she sponsored (H.R. 3962, as amended) is passed into law." More at _ http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/...
When and how did criminal sanctions find their way into all this? How does refusing to choose the federal government's grand new social order rise to the level of a crime??
For a look into the future look at what happened in Detroit, a big recipient of socialist experiments, where you can now buy a house for $7,500 (but who would want to live there?) -- http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/detroits-...
This doesn't become law, of course, until the Senate approves it and the President signs it. But I'll be talking to my senators tomorrow on this!!
80% of Americans are in favor of this bill. Sucks to be GOP in times like these. It's great not being ruled by ideology anymore.
How can 80% of Americans be in favor of HR 3962 when the American people have not been given the courtesy to read or debate the proposed legislation.
This must be a new survey that was taken 20 minutes ago by "hahaha."
With House Democrats racing to pass their 2,000-plus page health care reform bill this weekend, a new CNN/Opinion Research poll shows that an overwhelming majority of those surveyed 72 percent - want Congress either to make major changes, start over from scratch, or simply stop working on health care legislation.
Just 26 percent want Congress to pass the current health care proposal as is, or with minor changes.
80 per cent my ass. The vote was leass than 51 per cent. which tell me the Dems don't have a chance of passing this bill. It won't be approved in the Senate. No one reading these pages will be alive when Health reform passes.
This is an overwhelmingly good thing. Finally we can bring costs under control just like many other countries with a public option.
Ultimately we need single payer/medicare for all. This is a step in the right direction.
No cost savings. No lower health insurance. No better treatment. Just higher taxes like other countries with a government ran health care system.
This is a step in the socialist direction...
Krases -- right, such an overwhelmingly good thing, or else it's a $250,000 fine and five years in prison.
Yes cost saving. Over a 100 billion over 10 years and many times that over decades to come. Yes better treatment, just look at other nations with a public option and their average life expectancy/infant mortality rate (like Canada). With the public option providing competition, healthcare costs should come down across the board.
Also, socialism requires nationalization. No nationalization is happening in this bill, only the providing of stable competition and regulations to make things fare.
KillerB, would you prefer the tax payer pay for the uninsured? With the public option available, getting insured is vastly easier. I want a single payer system however. If we had single payer, this wouldn't be a problem.
It doesn't matter because it's DOA at the Senate.
"I want a single payer system however. If we had single payer, this wouldn't be a problem."
Krases -- and exactly why should that make me a criminal worthy of prison?
This bill is like cheap tolit paper,after many passes,it leaves little balls!
Who says I want Obammunism shoved down my throat and his czars to control me and my family from the cradle to the grave? The fact that they backdoored this shows you what kind of scandalous vermin they are. You are dreaming if you think the American population at large want's this Obamacare but socialist Marxist's don't care what the people want that's why they are Marxist. Why should I have to pay for 30 million illegal aliens who are in this country illegally and have broken the law by illegally crossing our borders? Why should I have to pay for some homo's aids treatment's and teenage abortions (murder) because some whore cannot keep her pants on? America is going to hell on a greased pole!!!
Hi azbycx0918,
who is more interested to have healthy and thus reliable employees. The employees or the employer. Why do employers offer health care at a such great number to their employees? They benefit from it. That's why the industry in general supports the measure.
The Kenyan Marxist in the White House has his clones in Congress bound and determined to break the back of free enterprise and American capitalism, and cause the demise of the Great Republic of North America.
Working people along with self employed risk takers will soon be gone from the American landscape.
Marxism
Maoism
Communism
Socialism
Czars
All things you know nothing about.