*This post was written by CP Advocacy intern, Yosef  Getachew

In a recent article written by the National Journal, it was revealed that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce not only spent the most money on health care lobbying last year but had also doubled what it had spent in 2008. As a result, the lobbying group spent $123.3 million in 2009 compared to $62.3 million in 2008 for all lobbying activities. Furthermore, a majority of this money was spent in the 4^th quarter of 2009, which was the height of the health care debate. The massive amount of spending done by the traditionally conservative lobbyist group demonstrates its efforts in derailing health care reform for millions of Americans:

The top-spending groups on health care reform generally spent about as much lobbying last year as they did in 2008 — with one notable exception. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce stood out not only for consistently outspending other groups, but also for nearly doubling its lobbying spending over the previous year. In the fourth quarter of 2009 alone, the group’s outflows easily topped the amount spent by any other group all year.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wasn’t the only one who spent millions of dollars to lobby against health care reform. An article written by Think Progress reports that health insurance companies spent a total of $38 million in 2009 to impede the progress of health care reform:

WellPoint: The Indiana-based insurer spent $4.7 million lobbying Congress last year, an increase of 21 percent from its expenditures in 2008.

UnitedHealth Group: The largest of all health insurance companies spent $4.5 million on lobbyists last year, an increase of 7 percent from 2008.

Humana: The insurance mega-company “showed the biggest increase in its lobbying spending among…insurers.” It spent $3.2 million lobbying in 2009, which is an 80 percent increase from 2008.

America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP): The health insurance industry’s lobbying group spent $8.9 million on lobbyists in 2009, a 20 percent increase from the previous year.

A protest lead by Health Care for America Now was held today to fight back against the U.S Chamber of Commerce.  Campus Progress attended the protest, which took place right on the steps of the lobbyist group’s building. Protestors shared stories and vehemently condemned the actions of lobbyist efforts as they urged Congress to finally pass health care reform.

The push for health care reform is possibly not moving anymore? But I am still trying to keep you in the loop with the debate over whether this bill has a chance of passing or not.  So for now, these semi-daily “Health on the Hill” updates will continue. Enjoy!

Today’s Updates – 1/22/10:

To be honest, I sat down to write a lengthy update on the madness and utter chaos this health care debate has turned into since the Massachusetts election on Tuesday, but Politico Pulse has summed it up perfectly, taking the words right out of my mouth:

DEATH WATCH — For the first time in this year-plus debate, Democrats are worried that health reform is in critical condition. House Speaker Pelosi can’t get 218 votes for the Senate bill. Senate moderates don’t want to take up another bill — skinny or reconciliation — and the White House isn’t yet calling the shots. “There’s a real possibility it doesn’t get through,” said a Democratic lobbyist who supports reform. “My guess is, for now, it’s over,” echoed another. There is a sense of anxiety and panic that has set in as Democrats ask, “What now?” Lobbyists familiar with the situation say officials are floundering to find a clear path forward. Reform’s passage, they say, has lost the sense of inevitability it had only a week ago. If Democrats are going to pass reform, Pelosi will need to find 218 votes for the Senate bill, Senate Majority Leader Reid will have to agree to take up budget reconciliation legislation to tweak a House-passed Senate bill — or both sides will have to go back to the drawing board to craft a slimmed-down reform bill. There was some talk among Senate leadership on Thursday of putting together a letter signed by 51 Democratic senators pledging to pass a clean-up bill if the House would pass the Senate bill. But that effort fizzled when support for it didn’t materialize, insiders said. Democratic leaders left the Capitol Thursday without answers and don’t expect any before next week.

Not sure you understand the reconciliation process? Or why are now in this position since Scott Brown took over Ted Kennedy’s seat in the Senate? You’re not alone, it’s a headache. But here’s an article from the Business Insider that attempts to break down the tricky process of reconciliation and sheds some light on how it might help with passing the health care bill:

The special election in Massachusetts has thrown the process into chaos. [The] Senate Democratic caucus [lost] “the Kennedy seat,” [and] the ability of the conference approved health care bill to overcome a filibuster [is] in doubt. Brown has made no bones about his plans to join a filibuster vote to block health care reform, campaigning as “the 41st vote” against it. That could mean the end of the death of health care reform.

In the 1970s the Senate adopted a rule that applies to the budget process that allows for limited debate, which means that there cannot be a filibuster. The process is called “reconciliation.” Here’s how reconciliation works.  Each of the Senate and the House passes a concurrent resolution  instructing one or more committees to report changes in a law affecting by a certain date. Those committees then support their reports to the budget committee, which combines them into a single omnibus bill. In the Senate, the reconciliation bill then gets only 20 hours of debate before the final vote. So there’s no filibuster risk and the bill can pass with support of just 51 Senators.

Health on the Hill is back!!!! And health care reform is still moving. Over the holiday break, we saw the legendary passage of the Senate health care bill and were confronted with the conflicting feelings of progress ( remember America has been trying to pass health care reform legislation for decades) and defeat (there were a lot of key compromises made on an already watered-down bill in order to get it passed). Nonetheless, Congress is charging forward to get the final bill completed and signed into law and we, as young Americans, should be ready to embrace the change it will create, while also continuing to push for the work that is yet to be done on reforming our health care system and ending the control insurance companies have over our health and our wallets. This reform bill will just be the beginning.

Today’s Updates – 1/15/10:

* The below post was written by CP Advocacy Intern, Christian Pittman

The Senate and House Democrats have eschewed formal conferencing to resolve the discrepancies between their respective health care bills and have taken to meeting with President Obama and aides at the White House. A desire to have a success story for the Dems before the State of the Union address (conveniently moved to not interfere with the season premiere of Lost) has set in motion Republican-free talks to make the needed compromises. We just have to hope that they don’t compromise all the beneficial parts out of the bill. As of now the public option is effectively dead. There’s no way to attract the votes needed in Congress with a government-run plan in either bill. As unfortunate as this is we can only hope that the reforms that do pass set us up as a nation to accept the public option in the future.

In order for the left to accept this, those in the House of Representatives are standing firm on their national exchange position where the whole country will have uniform laws and enforcement of coverage for as many people as possible, and where it will be easier for consumers to compare plans for purchase. While President Obama is leaning toward the national exchange, which the House adopted in its bill (as opposed to independently-run state exchanges adopted in the Senate bill), he seems to favor the Senate’s take on taxes (taxing high-cost insurance plans instead of taxing high-income individuals – both of which will generate revenue to pay for reform). This gridlock has seen lots of input from labor union leaders who have strong stakes in high-cost plans and therefore don’t want more taxes for their mostly middle-class members. So in order to convince the unions and House Democrats that those who gave up higher wages for better health care won’t be hit where it hurts, concessions were added this week in order to come to a compromise on the issue. Now just a few more sticking points, such as the expansion of Medicaid and the national vs. state exchange, are all that stand between the unified bill being completed and sent to the Congressional Budget Office for scoring.(a goal that Congress aims to accomplish by this weekend).

Meanwhile, while the Republicans in Congress have been mostly anti-reform, many of us on the other side were hearing how much the insurance companies (maybe some of the most influential players in this game) agreed with us and supported reform. They’re set to earn more money by gaining 30 million more customers (only a portion of the uninsured in the U.S.) so why wouldn’t they be happy to accept it? Apparently they’d rather gouge prices on their own terms than be regulated as competitive, fair institutions. AHIP (America’s Health Insurance Plans), a conglomeration of the most familiar names in health care, has been privately funding ads by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce against reform. A sum of $10-20 million was reportedly given to produce television ads attacking Congress’s reform bills.  So this just confirms our long-time suspicions that insurance companies are taking advantage of us in any way they can. This reform bill aims to curb some of the abusive tactics that insurance companies have used all these years, but we have to keep up the fight after the bill passes because there will still be a lot more work to be done.

As Campus Progress reported last fall, the youth are one of the largest groups of the uninsured and the Catastrophic Plan laid out in the Senate bill (which we are working hard to have improved before the bill is finalized)  is directed towards young people and severely lacking in comprehensive coverage options. As someone who has been lucky to not have any emergency treatments in my life (knock on wood) I can’t imagine having to go to the ER and fork over the bill in cash. Under the Catastrophic Plan for young individuals, that is precisely what I would have to do, unless of course I’d met my deductible of almost $6,000. I hardly make thousands of dollars in income. Not only that, but for those of us who have our regular check-ups or need prescription drug coverage, those services wouldn’t be covered under the Catastrophic plans. They are targeted at us with cheap prices and a conniving perception that we will now be insured, but the Catastrophic Plan is insurance in name only and we are fighting to improve this plan in order to give young Americans access to affordable, basic coverage (You can join the fight by taking action here!)

There is a lot yet to be resolved with this health care bill and not a lot of time to do it. So it will be up to us and our representatives to remember the real goals of health care reform and choose battles wisely –which means keeping the interests of the people in mind as opposed to the interests of the industry. However, this debate has gone on for a long time and as we watched the bill become more and more watered-down it has been clear that the industry tends to win out. As the next generation in power, and one that is dedicated to progress, we have to work to change that trend. 2010 offers up a great opportunity to start that work, by getting out to vote in the mid-term elections. The example of the power of one Congressional vote was clearly shown in the Lieberman debacle, and is about to rear its ugly head again as Massachusetts works to fill the late Senator Kennedy’s seat. Kennedy was a sure vote for health care reform and now the race to fill his seat seems it may result in Scott Brown, the running Republican, taking the seat, which means a sure vote against health care reform. The bill will need 60 votes to pass, so losing that vote could be the death of the bill. Just an example of how crucial our input is when it comes to electing those who represent our interests.

The push for health care reform is moving (or is it?) so I thought it’d be helpful to have semi-daily “Health on the Hill” updates that should help you keep track of the reform debate and get to the meat of the issue. Enjoy!

Today’s Updates – 12/15/09:

If it were up to Joe Lieberman, this is all we would have out of the health care reform bill: Free Band-Aids for All, courtesy of ol’ Joe, your favorite Senator. I mean, really?! What is the Obama Administration thinking? Cutting a deal with this (insert your favorite word here) to get a reform bill that has absolutely no public option, no wanna-be public option, no triggers; it is unfair and quite sad that our legislative process has come to this.

For those that don’t follow this health care drama regularly, this is where we are at: the Senate has one week to pass its health care bill, as the White House would like to see a bill before Christmas. However, in order to accomplish that, with all the crazy procedural steps it takes to pass a bill out of Senate, they would have to start voting to end debate this Thursday and hold the final vote on the bill on Christmas Day. Probably not gonna happen.

That just means the debate will continue into January, further prolonging the other equally as important pieces of legislation that Congress needs to focus on, such as the climate bill and the SAFRA bill, to name a few. On top of time line obstacles, the Senate is also being held up by a handful of senators who refuse to give health coverage to millions of Americans and instead just want their way. Like Joe Lieberman, who now looks to be getting his way, because in order to pass anything, the Senate needs 60 votes, and he is the lucky number 60.

This will be my last Health on the Hill update for 2009 – I am leaving the country, but will be back after the New Year — hopefully to a country that has decided to pass real health care reform for the good of its people instead of for one (insert your second favorite word here) from Maine.

News Links:

Sen. Reid bows to centrists,will drop Medicare buy-in to pass bill

Reid indicated at a closed-door Democratic Conference meeting on Monday that he would drop a controversial Medicare buy-in provision, which was offered as a replacement to the government-run health insurance option, to win the votes of Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.).

Obama: ‘Last chance’ for health reform

White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer told POLITICO: “If President Obama doesn’t pass health reform, it’s hard to imagine another president ever taking on this Herculean task. For those whose life’s work is reforming health care, this may be the last train leaving the station.”

Sen. Lieberman’s Donors Benefit From Obstruction

Lieberman has now invented a new excuse for his intransigence every month since June, and this latest act of duplicity has left many observers musing about what motivates him.  The hypotheses include spite for the left, “sociopathic indifference” to the consequences of his actions, and plain lack of intelligence. But it’s also worth noting once again that Lieberman has friends in the insurance industry who will benefit from his obstructionism.

The current discussions in the Senate over how to come to a compromise on the public option (which by the way takes a new shape about every two hours; with ideas bouncing from an “opt-in” option, to an “opt-out” option, to a “trigger” option, to a “reverse-trigger” option, to a “hammer” option, maybe next will be a “chisel” option?) may have finally reached a resting place. But the new “public option” compromise will not even include all of the public.

The newest compromise idea is to replace the public option all together and expand Medicare.  Sounds great at first, after all Medicare is the government-run, public plan that the idea of a new public option available to all Americans was based on in the first place. So the media and progressives, like Howard Dean, are getting pretty revved up about this idea to simply expand the already existing public plan because it brings us full circle in the public option debate.

But I ask a simple question: Am I missing something?! Because this “expansion” of Medicare will only be for those Americans ages 55 -64.  So the rest of us –including young adults who are the largest group of uninsured–  will be left out of this new “public” option replacement. I will note, though, that discussions also involve the expansion of Medicaid to low-income adults that make up to 150% of the Federal Poverty Level — this is an increase from what is currently in the Senate bill and will benefit many low-income Americans.

What about the rest of us? We will be given yet another compromise: non-profit insurance plans offered in the exchange, that will supposedly be similar to the plans currently offered to federal employees. But they might not be that similar to what is offered to federal employees, and may not necessarily reduce cost or create competition as a government run plan would have.

So either I am missing something, or Congress is missing the point –and leaving out young adults–once again. The saga contines.

The push for health care reform is moving, so I thought it’d be helpful to have semi-daily “Health on the Hill” updates that should help you keep track of the reform debate and get to the meat of the issue. Enjoy!

Today’s Updates – 12/7/09:

This post was written in part by Amy Minor, CP Intern

The Senate began debate on their health reform legislation last week, holding the first votes on amendments toward the end of the week. One good amendment by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), which will guarantee women age 40 and older receive mammograms with no out-of-pocket costs, passed 61 – 39.  Another amendment by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), which  would eliminate the $500 billion cuts to Medicare spending, and if approved, would have stripped out money needed to pay for expanding coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans, thankfully failed 58 – 42.

Although the Senate was able to vote on the first amendments of the health care bill, they worked long hours over the weekend struggling to reach agreements on key issues. One of these issues continues to be abortion. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) has said that he will withdraw his vote for the health care bill,  if it does not contain an abortion amendment similar to the Stupak amendment, which was passed in the House version of the health care bill last month. He is expected to present his amendment this afternoon. (Make sure you contact your Senator and urge them to vote NO on this amendment to avoid restricting women’s rights to abortion!)

If  Nelson decides to vote against the bill, this puts Majority Leader Reid in a difficult position because he cannot lose a single vote from his Democratic caucus and still pass the bill overall without picking up Republican support.  Reid will not gain Republican support for reform unless he further waters down the public option – a key issue for a handful of Democratic Senators and the key to whether or not one Republican – Olympia Snowe of Maine – will vote for health care reform.

Senator Reid and about 10 other senators spent Sunday afternoon discussing yet another compromise on the public option. This time reducing the idea down to a pathetic excuse for a solution. The new compromise centers around replacing the public option with a new health insurance exchange similar to the one offered to federal employees, with insurance plans run by non-profits –who already dominate the market and do not reduce the cost of insurance. In an effort to get 60 votes to pass health care reform, this is where we find ourselves: picking apart a provision that could have provided incredible insurance access and affordability to millions of Americans, but will now likely be an already existing, ineffective solution that gets signed into law only to avoid the scary words “government run”.

News Links:

Chances shrink for pure public option

Senate Democrats in search of a health reform compromise Sunday zeroed in on a new alternative to a government-run insurance plan — signaling that the chances a final bill will include a pure public option are diminishing.

You Call This a Compromise?

The goal of the current effort is simple: to get sixty votes to overcome a filibuster and pass a bill. Four of the sixty Senators who caucus with the Democrats have expressed, with varying degrees of certainty and specificity, that they don’t like the public option in the current bill. So the search is on for a compromise, any compromise..

Nelson: I’ll Filibuster Without Stupak-Like Amendment

“Now I don’t know that it’s going to come down to that, because I don’t know that Stupak’s not going to pass, number one,” he said. “Number two I don’t know what kind of alternative legislation may be offered as an alternative bill..”

Senate Backs Preventive Health Care for Women

The 61-to-39 vote on health benefits for women would, in effect, override new recommendations from a federal advisory panel that said routine mammograms should begin at age 50, rather than 40.

The push for health care reform is moving fast and furiously, so I thought it’d be helpful to have semi-daily “Health on the Hill” updates that should help you keep track of the reform debate and get to the meat of the issue. Enjoy!

Today’s Updates – 11/25/09:

Today’s update was written by Amy Minor, CP Advocacy Intern

Happy Thanksgiving! When we, and Congress, return next week the debate over the Senate health care bill will begin. Last Saturday night the Senate voted to begin debate on health care reform with a historic 60-39 vote.  Although this is a positive start for getting health care reform passed in Congress, the final passage of the bill is a long way off and will be a battle. The disputes that took place on Saturday reveal just how difficult the task will be for the Senate to find a compromise on key issues, like abortion, immigration and a public option, in the health care reform debate.

Along with dispute over the public option, abortion funding policy is going to be difficult to tackle among Democrats. Abortion rights supporters are backing Reid’s approach in the Senate bill, which tries to preserve an option of coverage for abortion, while proposing that federal dollars may only be used in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Reid’s approach may be one of the only ways of combating the Stupak amendment, which would bar any insurance plan — private or public — from covering abortions.

You can take action against the Stupak amendment here and join us for a National Day of Action Against Stupak on Dec 2!

News Links:

Public option at center of debate

Democrats had little time to savor their weekend Senate health-care victory, as two of the lawmakers who voted to move the debate forward Saturday night indicated Sunday that they will not vote to pass the package if it includes a government-run insurance program.

Schumer: Dems ready to go-it-alone on health care

A leading Senate Democrat said Monday his party is determined to push through a health care overhaul bill with or without Republican support because the “system is broken.”

PolitiFact Smacks Down Rep. Boehner’s “Abortion Premium” Claim

As the Senate moves to take up its version of the health care reform bill, Rep. Boehner alleged that the bill levied a new “abortion premium.”  PolitiFact.com reviewed his statement.

Lo and behold: the Senate has finally unveiled its health care reform legislation, and will officially announce the plan at a press conference this afternoon. Numbers and opinions are swirling around every media outlet in the country today and it can be mind-boggling to figure out what this means for you — the consumer. Here is my attempt to break down the Senate bill and highlight the provisions that may actually help to reform our system and those that are withered down to simply words on paper at this point.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act released by the Senate late last night is estimated to cost $849 billion over ten years, but with carefully placed taxes like those on high-income earners and on insurance policies that have high costs (also known as “Cadillac plans”), as well as generating savings from Medicare and Medicaid, the bill proposes to pay for these costs and will end up reducing the government’s deficit by $127 billion over the first decade. Most provisions in the bill will take effect by 2014 — what happens before then? Find out here.

The Good:

• 31 million of the uninsured will now gain health insurance.
• New health insurance exchanges will be created to choose from a range of insurance plans.
• There will be a public plan offered in the exchanges.
• Insurers can no longer deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions, health status or gender.
• Those making up to 133% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) can get coverage through Medicaid(expected to insure 15 million more people).
• Young adults will be able stay on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26.
• People making between 133% and 400% of the FPL will be able to receive assistance from the government to purchase insurance.
• The assistance is important because buying health insurance will now be a requirement for most everyone (except for those with very low-income).
• Employers with under 50 employees can buy insurance in the exchange as well (including self-employed people) and receive tax benefits for doing so.
• There will be caps on out-of-pocket expenses, like co-pays for doctor visits and deductibles.
• Preventive care will now be covered by insurance plans.
• Investments to bring more people into the health care workforce will be made through loan repayment programs and scholarships.

The Bad, The Ugly

• 24 million people will still remain uninsured, one-third of them are unauthorized immigrants.
• Unauthorized immigrants will be banned from purchasing insurance through the exchanges, even if they can pay the full costs themselves (in the House bill they would be allowed to buy in the exchange but without federal assistance).
• The health insurance exchanges will be on a state-by-state basis which is weaker than the national exchange offered in the House bill (think bigger pool of competition).
• The public plan is not much more than words on paper at this point. It will have higher premiums than the private plans (due to the fact that it will be negotiating its own rates to providers instead of using set rates tied to Medicare) and states can refuse to offer the public plan to its residents if they want to.
• Only 3-4 million people are expected to use the public plan, which defeats the purpose of it being effective with a large pool of consumers.
• Young adults up to age 30, as well as anyone who may not be able to afford insurance (if their premiums exceed 8% of income), will be eligible for a Catastrophic plan, which means millions of people could get sucked into a plan with almost no comprehensive coverage and really high costs.
• While 25 million people are expected to purchase coverage through the new exchanges, our health insurance system is still largely based on employer-provided insurance plans. Yet under this bill, employers will not be required to offer coverage to their employees.
• But if an employer with 50 or more workers does not offer coverage they will be fined $750 for every worker that requires federal assistance to purchase insurance in the exchange.  This is called the “free rider” provision and leaves the window wide open for companies to discriminate against hiring low-income workers and will encourage them to hire illegal immigrants.
• There will be $50 million put towards abstinence-only sex education (way to throw money at ineffective solutions).

The Big Compromise

• Abortion: The issue of whether a legal medical procedure should be covered by insurance or not shouldn’t even be a question, but this is America –the land of pro-choice vs. anti-choice– so it is. That said, the Senate bill has slightly less restrictive provisions for coverage of abortion than the House bill does with its Stupak-Pitts amendment.
• Under the Senate bill, insurance plans can choose whether to cover abortions or not, but in each state there has to be at least one plan that covers it and one that doesn’t.
• Unlike in the House bill, people receiving federal assistance to buy insurance can buy a plan that covers abortion, but the insurer can only use the money contributed by the consumer to pay for abortion services, putting the federal funds toward other services only. (This whole separation of funds for a certain medical procedure just irks me.  To paraphrase Kierra Johnson of Choice USA, “I can’t separate my uterus from the rest of my body, right?”. It’s like going to the doctor and saying ‘you can go ahead and bill me separately for the part of the check up where you assessed the health of my uterus’.)
• Finally, the public plan could provide abortion coverage but would have to segregate federal dollars, just like the private plans.

That’s it in a long nutshell; the Senate bill that will now be debated and amended over the month of December, and then merged with the House bill to produce what will hopefully be a still recognizabe piece of legislation aimed at reforming our health insurance system.  Click here for a helpful side-by-side comparison of the Senate and House bills.