banktime.com

This morning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finally unveiled the long-awaited draft of the first House healthcare bill. The proposal will give insurance benefits to as many as thirty-six million Americans under a massive, tremendously expensive (almost nine hundred billion dollars) healthcare reform scheme that will expand Medicaid and grant subsidies to millions of middle-income Americans so that they can either purchase private insurance or buy into the revolutionary new government plan. According to Pelosi, a Congressional Budget Office analysis determined that the proposed plan would meet President Obama’s criteria of not adding even “one dime” to the federal deficit, and would actually reduce projected future deficits by around thirty billion dollars.

The monstrous, two thousand page piece of legislation is the fruit of months and months of work by Pelosi and House Democrats and the amalgamation of no less than three separate proposals already cleared by a trio of separate House panels in the past several months. Calling the day “historic,” Pelosi trumpeted the bill’s landmark significance to the struggling families of the United States. She pointed out that the battle for healthcare reform has been an uphill, bipartisan struggle for the better part of the last century. The House bill almost precisely mirrors Senate majority leader Harry Reid’s proposal, which marries two pieces of legislation passed by Senate committees over the summer. But there are some significant differences between the two bills.

For one, Pelosi’s House bill would impose what is being called a “millionaire’s tax” on individuals making more than five hundred thousand dollars a year, and on couples who earn more than one million dollars. As for the Senate’s bill, it would place a tax on pricey insurance policies, in a motion that experts say could help lower long-term health care costs by giving employers, employees and private insurers incentive to reduce out-of-pocket spending. Both chamber’s bills would widen the number of options currently available to those living without healthcare coverage and insurance, as well as significantly tighten restrictions on the health insurance industry. The most commonly-cited example of this change in practice is the end to denial of coverage based on pre-existing medical conditions. But Republican lawmakers in both chambers share the same sentiments about the legislation: it’s too expensive, too far-reaching, and completely unwise. Most conservative congressmen will not deny that healthcare reform is needed, but are appalled at the current proposals. A collective news release from House Republicans scoffed at the proposal, opining that Americans neither “need nor deserve” the House’s flavor of reform.

But Pelosi refused to have the moment dampened. Stating that Congress had “[its] clarion call,” and declaring “Onward to Congress!,” she again lauded a proposal that would give healthcare coverage to an estimated ninety-six percent of all Americans and make a striking step towards much-needed industry reform. Notable lawmakers proudly stood beside the House speaker to herald the ushering in of a new era, one in which many more of our countrymen will have health insurance and fewer headaches concerning the costs and administration of their healthcare for themselves and for their families as well.