Whip Count (No. 4 in a series): Grijalva Leaning Toward Voting No
EmailFrom Sunlen Miller: Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz., the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told Salon.com today with the inclusion of Republican ideas and compromises in the president’s health care proposal he is leaning now towards opposing the legislation. “As I weigh it, I think — for me — a 'no' vote is something that I continue to lean toward," Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz told Salon.com today, "Especially the last additions — that was kind of a slap in the face for all of us who fought for the public option." Grijalva takes issue in particular with increased health savings accounts, one of the four Republican items added to the president’s proposal. That provision "was, when we were in the minority, something that we fought tooth and nail to keep out [of legislation]," Grijalva said of the HSA’s.”I find that ironic — something that we had fought to keep out, and indeed were successful, gets back in as part of reconciliation. And a public option that enjoys great support in the House and up to 30 senators gets left out. That's something I just don't understand." Grijalva also hinted that there are “more than just two” members of the 79 member progressive congress that would vote “no” to the legislation, as there were last time when the House version was voted on in the fall. As we’ve previously covered, 220 members of Congress voted for the bill when Pelosi brought the House legislation to a vote. Since then, four yes votes are no more: Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, R-Louisiana, has said he won’t vote for final passage, Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hi., retired to run for governor, Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., also retired, and Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., died. That means to pass the Senate bill, Pelosi starts out with 216 members of Congress who votes yes last time. With the pending retirement of Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., there will soon be only 431 Members of Congress total, meaning a majority will be 216 votes -Sunlen Miller
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
What is the Dems problem with HSAs anyway?
Posted by: Bonhomme | March 3, 2010, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
I don’t understand that either, Bonhomme. As I understand the provision, it allows people the flexibility to decide how to spend their own money. Aahhhhhhhh! Maybe that’s the problem! THEY get to decide how to spend it!
Posted by: Bobbi | March 3, 2010, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
There’s a story out now that Obama is giving an undecided Democrat’s brother an appeals court position.
This is how Chicago politics works.
Posted by: PC Madness | March 3, 2010, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm
What is the Dems problem with HSAs anyway?
Posted by: Bonhomme | Mar 3, 2010 6:33:28 PM
I like HSAs with a caveat. You have to shop around because premiums don’t include the the fees an HSA consumer is charged before he or she maxes out the deductible. Moreover not all plans count preventive services as counting toward the deductible; hence some people avoid preventive services (e.g. mammograms). Also, while federal law sets a limit on the deductible for HSA-qualified high deductible plans ($5,800 for individual policies and $11,600 for families in 2009), and many policies cap total out-of-pocket expenditures you can have in a year (50% of plans had limits less than $6,000 in 2008), you can still end up with a low amount of catastrophic coverage (say $150,000) which will quickly get eaten up if you are in a very serious accident, sustain chronic injuries or become terminally ill. And low to lower and middle class income Americans gain very little in the way of tax savings.
They’re geared toward healthier, wealthier and high information type insureds.
Studies have shown that 42 percent of individuals with HDHPs and 31 percent with CDHPsspent 5 percent or more of their income on health care costs– out-of-pocket costs plus premiums–in a year, compared with about 12 percent spending that much of their income on health care– out of pocket plus premiums– when covered under comprehensive health plans.” Those with HDHPs and CDHPs were also more likely to skip, avoid or delay getting care.
Posted by: progressive mama | March 3, 2010, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm
And then there’s the bigger picture, per Think Progress:
“A study by the Harvard School of Public Health analyzed the health savings accounts enacted in Singapore and found they had “caused financial hardship for Singapore’s citizens and…adversely affected the cost-effectiveness of its health care system.” Likewise, in South Africa, which has “a decade’s worth of experience with similar consumer-driven health plans,” the cost of specialty care has increased 43 percent, the cost of hospital care is up 65 percent, and uninsured rates have “continued to grow rapidly.”
Posted by: progressive mama | March 3, 2010, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm
If I were a Democrat congressman, I would definitely be leaning no at this point. There are riches to be had, why not me?
Posted by: Quo Warranto | March 3, 2010, 11:04 pm 11:04 pm
wow, HSA’s are only a bad thing in crazyland.
Posted by: wow | March 4, 2010, 1:03 am 1:03 am
The progressive Democrats can either have a perfect bill (meaning no health reform at all) or this bill, which will expand coverage to millions. I would have loved to have the public option as well, but it’s gone. Be pragmatic and solve this problem to the best of your ability now or find work elsewhere.
Posted by: aos | March 4, 2010, 11:38 am 11:38 am