Video Summary

Bill Statistics

The Middle Class Position

The middle class supports.

How They Voted

61% with middle class
38% against middle class
1% did not vote
Pie Chart

Grades

Grade C
Senate

The Senate receives a grade of C for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.

60 Senators voted for the middle-class position; 38 voted against.

Share This Report Card

(H.R. 3590) On passage of legislation making major changes in the national health care system

Introduced:
01.01.1970 [House]
The Legislation: 

This was a vote on final passage of legislation making major changes in the national health care system. The legislation, among other things, imposed a requirement that most Americans have health insurance, added 15 million people to the HYPERLINK "http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/medicaid/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier" \o "Recent and archival health news about Medicaid." Medicaid rolls, provided funding to subsidize the purchase of private health insurance coverage for low- and middle-income people, and prohibited insurance companies from refusing coverage because of “pre-existing conditions.”

Deputy Senate Majority Leader Durbin (D-IL) was among those leading the support for the legislation. He argued that the bill will “expand (insurance) coverage to 30 million more Americans (and end) . . . abuses by health insurance companies.” Durbin said there has been a long-standing “battle” between consumers and insurers, and that the legislation “is about (W)ho will win . . . the American people or the health insurance companies (and passage of the bill will mean) . . . “it will be the American people.” Durbin also argued: “(I)f you believe (health care) is a privilege for those who are wealthy . . . then you will vote against this. If you believe it is a right . . . that should be extended to more Americans . . . join us in supporting it.”

Durbin also claimed the legislation “is the greatest deficit reduction bill in the history of the United States. We have now been told by the Congressional Budget Office this bill will not only reduce our deficit over the next 10 years by over $130 billion, but in the following 10 years, their new calculation is it will reduce the deficit of the United States up to $1.3 trillion. . . It achieves this by . . . (bringing) down the increase in costs in health care.”

Sen. Harkin (D-IA), another supporter of the bill, said it sends an “important message to Americans . . . that your insurance company can no longer discriminate against you . . . .”

Sen. Grassley (R-IA) said he opposed the bill because, if implemented, "taxes are going to go up . . . premiums are going to go up . . . (and) inflation in health care is not going to go down." Sen. Enzi (R-WY), another opponent, did acknowledge: “This country needs health care reform”. However, Enzi claimed that the legislation the Senate was considering “fails to address “the reasons that reform is needed.” Enzi said the bill “would raise taxes by $493 billion (and) . . . these taxes will only increase (insurance) costs, making health care even more unaffordable.”

Enzi also claimed it would “still leave 24 million people without insurance coverage.” He argued that the increased taxes the bill would impose on employers to help pay for the costs of the bill would “eliminate millions of American jobs and reduce wages for millions of American workers.” Enzi also argued: “The bill . . . eliminates consumer choices, requiring Americans to buy richer types of plans that cover more of the deductibles and cover more out-of-pocket expenses. These plans typically have much higher premiums.”

Sen. Snowe (R-ME) focused her opposition partly on the provisions in the legislation imposing an increased Medicare payroll tax on high-income individuals and a new excise tax on high-premium insurance policies. Sen. Alexander (R-TN), another opponent, argued that the bill was just “an expansion of the current system” of which the Democrats were so critical.

The legislation passed by a vote of 60-39 along straight party lines. All sixty “aye” votes were cast by Democrats. All thirty-nine “nay” votes were cast by the Republicans present. As a result, the Senate passed a major health care reform bill, which would have to be reconciled with the House-passed version of the bill before becoming law.

The Middle-Class Position: 

Middle Class Supports. Access to health care is a critical component of a middle-class standard of living. Skyrocketing health care costs have created a vicious and destabilizing trap for middle-class Americans in which employer-sponsored coverage is offered less frequently and private coverage is increasingly unaffordable. Meanwhile, successful public programs that effectively cover children (SCHIP), the poor (Medicaid), and the elderly (Medicare) are unavailable to middle-class adults. Almost 46 million nonelderly Americans lack health insurance, the majority of whom are low- and middle-income, and the rate of the uninsured has grown significantly since 2000. At the same time, the average worker’s health care premium has increased 128% (to $3,515) since 1999. One study even found that just shy of two thirds of all bankruptcies are due to medical expenses even though the vast majority of these bankruptcies involve families who have health insurance. Because employers, too, have had to absorb similar premium increases, employer-sponsored insurance – the type of insurance most middle-class Americans obtain – has declined significantly in each of the last eight years. The economic downturn has exacerbated this situation and experts estimate that each percentage point increase in the unemployment rate results in substantial increases in the number of uninsured Americans. Given the high costs of obtaining insurance in the private, non-group market, which is nearly impossible without steady employment, many Americans have simply given up coverage over the last several years. In short, a perfect storm of increasing health care costs and a down economy has undermined the financial stability and endangered the wellbeing of the middle class and the aspiring middle class.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would do much to relieve the financial stress placed on these households by high health insurance costs while also extending health coverage to millions of Americans. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill would reduce the number of uninsured to 23 million, leaving just 6 percent of the population without health coverage. Expanding Medicaid to cover low-income adults is one of the most effective and cost-efficient means of covering more aspiring middle-class Americans. The expansion would enroll about 15 million individuals in Medicaid, providing an important public backstop for aspiring middle-class families. Indeed, public programs have successfully kept millions of children from becoming uninsured, while the lack of such programs for low-income childless adults has led to increased numbers of the uninsured among this population. Similarly, subsidized coverage in the Health Benefits Exchanges would reduce health care costs for tens of millions of households. Premium savings could be as high as $10,000 for a low-income household of four. Such savings are targeted at the very groups that need the most help.

At the same time as it helps reduce health care costs for middle-class and aspiring middle-class Americans, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act greatly improves health coverage by enacting strict requirements for the type of insurance that is offered. The bill prevents the nightmare scenarios of being denied coverage just because you have become sick or being forced to pay higher premiums because of a preexisting condition (in many policies, being a woman is effectively considered a preexisting condition). Eventually, it will define minimum benefits and cost limits that must be included in most health insurance plans, not just ones offered by the Health Benefits Exchanges. And it will ensure that health insurers do not use premiums to pay for administrative costs and profits, instead of medical care. In this way, affordable and adequate health insurance that protects individuals and their families during both normal medical events and extraordinary medical hardship will be available to all aspiring middle-class and middle-class households.

Finally, the Act contains cost-cutting strategies to reduce the impact of health care costs on the budget deficit and additional measures to reorient health care delivery to quality, preventive care and away from costly and unnecessary overtreatment. Eliminating overpayments to Medicare Advantage, the ill-advised, Bush-era privatization of a chunk of Medicare and a tax on expensive health insurance plans, which is likely to result in fewer such plans being offered, are effective ways to cut costs without weakening coverage.

From the Experts: 

“The Senate bill protects the guaranteed benefits that people in Medicare rely on, and makes progress toward ending the rampant discriminatory tactics used by insurers to deny coverage to those who need it most.”
–Nancy LeaMond, Vice President, AARP (December 21, 2009)

“All Americans deserve affordable, high-quality health coverage so they can get the medical care they need – and this bill advances many of our priority issues for achieving the vision of a health system that works for patients and physicians. Lifetime limits on health coverage will be a thing of the past – as will higher premiums based on medical conditions or gender. These are important benefits for those who have insurance now – and those who want it but have been unable to get it.”
–Cecil B. Wilson, M.D., President-elect, American Medical Association (December 21, 2009)

Beyond this Bill: 

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a momentous step forward in a complex debate about how best to expand and improve health care coverage in the United States. While the reforms included in the legislation are robust, future versions of the legislation should quicken the pace of implementation – many of the provisions, including the expansion of Medicaid and the opening of the Health Benefits Exchanges do not occur for several years – and work to expand access to the Exchanges for as many Americans as possible. Ensuring that everyone who wants access to plans in the Health Insurance Exchange has access should be a goal of future versions, rather than imposing strict limits on eligibility. The articulation of a robust minimum benefits plan in the Exchange and close vigilance of the health insurance plans offered outside the Exchange are critical components of the legislation’s success. Without effective implementation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will not accomplish its twin goals of expanding coverage and increasing affordability, but will also fall short of its lofty objective of cutting health care costs.

Unfortunately, the Senate version of health care reform falls short of the House’s version in many respects. First among these shortcomings is that the Senate bill expands insurance to 5 million fewer people than the House legislation. The Senate bill also lacks the so-called public option, a government-run insurance plan that could compete with private insurers and drive down health care costs. Furthermore, the Senate bill includes a smaller expansion of Medicaid; continues to exempt insurance companies from antitrust regulations that help the industry exercise monopoly authority; includes less stringent regulations, particularly with respect to out-of-pocket expenses; and generally delays implementation of the bill’s most important provisions beyond the already sluggish implementation timetable set out by the House’s bill.

Finally, the legislation erects significant impediments for low-income and middle-class women seeking to obtain health coverage that includes coverage for abortions, while preserving the ability of the wealthy to get the care they need. This provision stands in stark contrast to most of the bill, which is designed to expand access to health services to all.

Maine New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut New York New Jersey Pennsylvania Delaware Maryland West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Florida Alabama Mississippi Tennessee Virginia Kentucky Ohio Indiana Michigan Illinois Wisconsin Louisiana Arkansas Missouri Iowa Minnesota Oklahoma Kansas Nebraska South Dakota North Dakota Texas Colorado New Mexico Arizona Utah Wyoming Hawaii Alaska Montana Nevada Idaho California Oregon Washington