Instant replays and a potential playbook
|August 27, 2009||Posted by ITUP under Blog||
CQ recently posted an analysis on the accuracy of certain statements (from both sides of the argument) regarding HR 3200 and cites their sources. Cutting through the hot topic inaccuracies like “death panels” and “rationed care for seniors,” it also investigates some other interesting arguments like:
Employers will have to automatically enroll their workers in the public plan, according to the House bill. (False)
Legislation restructuring the health care system will not add to the federal budget deficit. (False)
The government would have “real-time access” to individual bank accounts and create a “national ID health card.” (False)
See the full analysis here.
In other developments, the White House is now seriously considering splitting the reform bill into two pieces in order to utilize the reconciliation process. One package would contain the provisions with significant bipartisan support, such as insurance regulations barring the harmful practices of insurance companies and others that require no additional spending. This package would much more easily gain the needed 60 Senate votes. The other package would abide by the reconciliation process, and contain the highly contentious elements such as the public plan option and tax increases to finance reform. In this process, only a simple majority would be needed for passage.