TPM LiveWire

Pelosi Unveils House Health Care Bill

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is unveiling the House health care reform bill this morning. In her opening remarks, she said, "Today we are about to deliver on a promise of making affordable quality health care available for all Americans, laying a foundation for a brighter future for generations to come."

Pelosi said the bill will "insure 36 million more Americans" and "will not add one dime to the deficit" -- covering 96 percent of Americans and costing less than $900 billion. The bill includes a public option and will end "discrimination for preexisting medical conditions."

She said the plan will be put online "for all Americans to see." You can read it here.

Early in her remarks, there was some loud off-camera noise -- apparently from protesters nearby.

"Thank you, insurance companies of America," Pelosi said.

Here's the video:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was up next. "What a day for America, and what a day for all of our people," he said

The bill is expected to be debated on the House floor next week.

If implemented, by 2013, the bill would require a mandate for coverage and a health insurance exchange to be in place. There would, by this point, be new consumer protections, including an end to co-pays for routine checkups and preventative care, yearly caps on out-of-pocket expenses and an end to yearly and lifetime caps on what insurance companies will cover.

Young adults would also be able to stay on their parents' health care plans until their 27th birthdays.

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) also spoke, saying he was "delighted to get up here and celebrate with you this proud day."

The House's health care reform bill, Dingell said, is "a piece of legislation conceived in the greatest openness, fairness and frankness."

A few minutes later, Dingell waved a gavel in the air as he declared: "We are going to see that Social Security and Medicare is protected!"

He then put the gavel down and added that the only citizens who are going to have to worry" about being cut from Medicare "are the insurance companies."

Pelosi then spoke again to wrap up the event, saying she wanted to honor deceased Sen. Ted Kennedy who made health care reform "his life's work."

"As you can see," Pelosi said, "we have our clarion call."

Here's the full video of Pelosi's opening remarks.

Join the Conversation!

32 comments

Recommend Recommend (3)

October 29, 2009 10:47 AM   

"Thank you, insurance companies of America," Pelosi said.

I don't know what they've been putting in Nancy's Wheaties lately, but I like it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:57 AM    in reply to agio

.
Will Democrats invoke the Reconciliation process?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=6388

.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 10:50 AM   

Good move of Pelosi to focus the HCR presser on how it will help MediCare, especially now that the GOP is targetting AARP as a left-wing fringe group.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 10:58 AM   

Won't add a dime to the deficit... but I'll bet it will allow insurance executives to get that third vacation home!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:04 AM   

They cover 36 mill by moving millions of people on to Medicaid. Not good for states at all. I will wait for Jon Cohn and Ezra though, I take what they say as pretty much fact.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:59 AM    in reply to theone718

Can you provide some evidence for this claim?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:23 PM    in reply to El Puerco

Easy. They expaind Medicaid to those 150 percent above FPL instead of 133 percent, that's ALOT MORE PEOPLE. That's EVEN MORE of a burden for states but that is the only way to expand coverage and affordability without the use of a robust PO.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:20 AM   

Don't forget folks: Changes had to be made to Social Security and Medicare after their inital passage.

This is just the beginning!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:22 AM   

What does this Bill do for those who don't have jobs or are layed off?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 2:05 PM    in reply to VictorLH

Nothing. Doesn't do anything about global warming, either.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 11:50 AM   

i sure the bill is not perfect, but it can be perfected. 2010 is too long. they would be better off trying to get this ready for the mid-term in 2010.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:08 PM   

Nancy, you hit this one out of the park! Way to go, we're proud of you!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:14 PM    in reply to Doug in Mount Vernon

Huh? A watered-down public option that doesn't kick in until 2013? That is a sick joke.

If Republicans win back seats in 2010 & 2013 their first order of business will be to repeal whatever healthcare reforms the Dems pass now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:17 PM    in reply to theWalrus

Exactly, 2013 is a long way away for a lot of people who need health care now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:57 PM    in reply to theWalrus

I didn't know we had an election in 2013. When did we amend the Constitution or have a coup?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:24 PM    in reply to theWalrus

Yes, because I'm sure Obama would sign legislation repealing reform. And that congressional dems would not return the fillibuster favor of the current republicans.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:40 PM    in reply to theWalrus

That's a big if. The thugs are not going to pick up many seats if any in 2010. If I were a betting person, I'd bet on that one.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:15 PM   

This is great I guess. But if there is a mandate, how does that actually benefit me and my family when we can't afford health insurance right now. My husband works for the county of Los Angeles which is no longer providing paid health coverage for it's employees. Our premiums are going up to almost $600 a month (the cheapest offered) and we can't afford it so we're being dropped. I want to know what that public option is going to look like and how much it will be for a family of 2. Because if it is anything like Cobra then we can't afford that either. This still looks like a bill that treats insurance corporations with kid gloves and leaves the rest of us behind. Medicare would be better. Just take the part that says 'over 65' off the page and it would be as simple as that; everyone would be covered.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:22 PM    in reply to artgurrl

Sure that'd be great. But how do we get there? It's not even a done deal that we can get this less than ideal bill passed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:25 PM    in reply to artgurrl

There really is no substitute for single payer. I would finance it at least partly by raising the tax rate for the highest income earners, and I would suggest a VAT for some of the rest. I don't know how much this would cover, but it would be a start. Having said this, we both know that as long as the American people worship at the alter of capitalism and free enterprise, single-payer will never happen. Oh well.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:47 PM    in reply to artgurrl

Fund it by cutting the budget at the Pentagon by 300 billion, bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan along with closing some other bases around the world, that would be a good start. Raise taxes on the millionaires, legalize marijuana and tax it, tax corporations on imports that decide to shut down their businesses here and move overseas for cheap labor, and finally go after the offshore tax haven accounts. All of these would not only fund Medicare for all but would vastly improve our education system, our infrastructure and some new hospitals, libraries and colleges.
It's all a matter of what our priorities in this country should be. As it stands we have it all backwards.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:32 PM    in reply to artgurrl

Why not ride a unicorn on a rainbow?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:47 PM    in reply to artgurrl

Actually, you are right about medicare for all. If medicare were open to all people, you would have a huge pool of younger people that use less healthcare in the system and the overall cost of the medicare program per person would be greatly reduced. As it is now, medicare covers the portion of the population that uses, by far, the most healthcare.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:01 PM    in reply to xargaw

No kidding. The "Medicare for Everyone" notion is brought up every so often, then it goes away. Then it comes back, is discussed for twenty minutes or so, then goes away again. No one that I have seen has rebutted the logic, yet this brilliant, easy-to-implement plan never gains any traction. The structure is all in place, no need to reinvent the wheel...can SOMEONE please explain to me why we're getting a horse designed by a committee (at best) instead of simply extending what already works to every citizen in the country who wants it?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:58 PM    in reply to artgurrl

This post here:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/29/798476/-The-2010-Reforms-in-the-House-Healthcare-Reform-Bill

outlines the reforms that will happen immediately once this bill is signed. The PO will still not take effect until 2013.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:28 PM   

It's time to invoke reconciliation. Please. Joe Lieberman was on Fox yesterday indicating that he would vote against cloture. Please. Get a good bill and take the power away from fringe "Democrats." It's really sick -- both our health care system and the fact that Joe-mentum can take so much from it to ensure that we insure fewer people. Enough. The system is sick. it's time to heal it. The only way that happens is through reconciliation.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:47 PM   

Why do we have a Senate? If it wasn't for the Senate lurking in the background, we would have gotten an even better bill out of the House. All these chickenpoop "moderates" provide cover for each other, by speaking up for "fiscal responsibility." That is just code for the status quo, and the huge campaign contributions. It's time for the legendary Chicago style politics I've heard so much about. Maybe this Halloween Obama can invoke the spirit of LBJ and clean some clocks. Until then, I don't know hoe to feel about this bill. Is this a victory, or just a capitulation to weak kneed bluedogs?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:58 PM   

Wait a minute. Implemented by 2013?? I hope that means "fully implemented," as in "starting right away, it might take a couple of years to get the whole thing up and running smoothly."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 12:59 PM    in reply to JimmyBobby

See above, I replied to the wrong post.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:05 PM    in reply to agio

Thanks. I feel a little better, but still have never heard anyone explain why simply offering Medicare to anyone who wants it (as the PO, not -- Dog forbid -- as Single Payer) shouldn't be easier, quicker and even cheaper.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:12 PM    in reply to JimmyBobby

I agree Medicare For All would make for better policy. Unfortunately it won't survive sausage factory that is the US Congress.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 29, 2009 1:41 PM   

Thank you Madam Speaker. You are da bomb!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on