March 22nd, 2010
08:59 PM ET

Evening Buzz: Health Care Fight Not Over

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/POLITICS/03/22/senate.health.care.ahead/story.senatelogo.gi.jpg caption="The U.S. Senate is set to tackle the House-approved health care reform reconciliation bill." width=300 height=169]

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

The fight over health care is far from over. Yes, the House approved sweeping reform last night. Pres. Obama will sign that legislation into law tomorrow at the White House. But there's also the separate compromise package that still needs approval from the Senate. No members of the GOP backed the House vote yesterday and Republicans in the Senate are vowing to do whatever they can do to try and stop the $940 billion plan from getting approval.

Tonight on 360° we have the raw politics and raw emotion and we'll show you what this all means for you and your family.

Here are some of the immediate changes that will take effect with Pres. Obama's signature:

– Insurance companies will no longer be able to cancel or deny policies to children due to pre-existing conditions.
– Insurance plans would also have to cover the cost of certain preventive care & not include that care in deductibles.
– They also will not be able to place lifetime caps on policy payouts.
– Young adults will be eligible to stay on their parents' insurance plans until they turn 26

Though, keep in mind, most of the significant changes don't take effect until 2014. We'll run through the timeline for you.

We'll also talk with Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, who made the last-minute deal with the White House that called for Pres. Obama to issue an executive order guaranteeing that the health care bill would not change existing limits on federal funding for abortion. When Rep. Stupak delivered a speech on the House floor last night defending the deal you heard someone call out "baby killer." Texas Republican Rep. Randy Neugebauer revealed today he was the one connected to the outburst. Though, he insists he said "It's a baby killer", in reference to the deal itself, not to Congressman Stupak himself. Neugebauer has apologized to Mr. Stupak. We'll dig deeper on the heated moment with the Michigan congressman.

As I mentioned, there's still the Senate vote on the series of changes. Republicans say they'll use any and all legislative tactics to try and stop the reconciliation bill from passing. Those tactics can include unlimited objections and amendments. If any of those amendments pass, it has to go back to the House. We'll talk about the maneuvering with CNN's Dana Bash on Capitol Hill.

There's also the battle brewing in at least 11 states to try to block the legislation. Once Pres. Obama signs the bill into law tomorrow several attorneys general are planning legal challenges, claiming it's unconstitutional to require all Americans to carry health coverage or face a fine. Today White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the Obama administration expects to win any lawsuits filed against the bill. Anderson will talk with Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff about his state's pending legal fight.

With all of this as a backdrop, Pres. Obama plans to hit the road to sell the reform to skeptical Americans. He'll give a speech Thursday in Iowa City, Iowa. That's where he first launched his push for reform in May 2007, before becoming president. The president and his party could take big hits over this in the November mid-term elections. We'll talk that over, as well, with our panel of experts tonight.

What do you think of the bill passed and the battles still to come? Sound off below.

Join us for all the angles tonight at 10 P.M. ET. See you then.

Filed under: Maureen Miller • The Buzz
soundoff (55 Responses)
  1. Buck Rutledge

    Given all the benefits of the health care reform law, the protesting crowds and the promise of repeal from Republicans are surprising. After all, about the same amount of money has been spent on recent wars, and on rescuing the financial system, and on economic stimulus without all of the political and public vitriol. So the cries for fiscal responsibility and personal liberty may just be cover for two, less flattering reasons to fight reform. First, many people do not want to pay required monthly premiums to make the reform possible; and second, the currently insured do not want 32 million more people packing waiting rooms and competing for care from a limited number of doctors.

    What a sad reflection on our society.

    March 23, 2010 at 9:33 am |
  2. Joan Hart

    I think health reform is a long overdue. I was on COBRA until the 1st of the year. It expired and you have to be declared disabled by the SSA to get it extended. I have filed but have not receive an answer. I applied for an indivual policy at the same company I worked for for almost 20 yeasr and was denied because of pre-existing conditions. I knew before I applied but I needed health insurance so I tried.. I have been diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease and regardless of all the reports about organizations to call to help, the bottomline they want you to have health insurance. I have been referred to a Movement Disorder Clinic but I will probably not keep the appointment because I have to make the choice of keeping a place to live as long as I can, or pay for the services. IThese politicians that confess to have so much faith must have a different Bible because the one I read teaches that God intended for us to help one another. The Bible uses an exaple of when you have one two coats and your brother has none ,give your brother the other. If these so called Christians can not see that health care is needed fo everyone they need to go to Bible Studies and understand that it does not teach : I got mine, you get yours". as one of the Hispanic reps stated on CNN yesterday. He stated that he kept himself healthy and he should not be concerned about anyone. Well I kept my self healthy too and when I need health insurance I can not get it. Thank you.

    March 23, 2010 at 9:25 am |
  3. Cam

    Everyone is required to have auto insurance if you have a car, no one complains about that....

    March 23, 2010 at 8:59 am |
  4. Greg

    Can someone remind Stupack (spelling) that Oboma campaigned on not using executive orders. And that this EO was used to ramrod such a controversial bill (and unpopular) thru the process. Using an EO to push thru a bill that 60% of the country doesent want is i reprehensible!

    March 23, 2010 at 5:38 am |
  5. J.V.Hodgson

    I see a whole set of differing viewpoints above. The positive are based on what is actually in the bill or the Executive order, and constantly its cost is debated or raised. Yes it does cost money, does it increase the overall nation debt or need to borrow money? The CBO says no and that is the independent body both political parties use to evaluate and validate thier political policies. It may not be perfect but state your case accurately, and stop saying our grandchildren will have to pay for this debt. According to the CBO and Politico fact check that is " pants on fire!"
    The State AG'S idea and proposed action aims directly at a fundamental principle of cost benefit in Insurance and its the Actuarial evaluation. If you do not understand that check it out. But in simple terms the most likely opt outs of health care would be the young and realtively healthy, what that does is force up premiums expecially in an aging society since they the aging use more facilities medications and usually end up with some serious hospitalisation. If you want the average cost to all of medical insurance to reduce to all people you must have a complete coverage market for all individuals.
    Think for a moment American fee choice people, you dont have it on motor insurance, If you have a mortgage you dont get it without House insurance for fire flood etc. There is constututional justification for this bills demand and cost logic for everyones benefit.
    Now, Republicans promising unlimited amendments and objections. they are going to have to be pretty smart as if it lost already in the house an senate it should logically have to be a new idea I think Pelosi and Reid can say fairly you got some content in this reconciliation bill already so put your new ideas to the House and senate as another amendment bill, so we can a proper bi partisan debate not just obstruction! And OH please remember, the Senate bill is law already. these guys need to get real. If they are so right they can win votes in the House and senate for whatever changes they want other than total repeal, they should stop being childish, and start being constructive and so should state AG'S who would have great difficulty even with this biased SCOTUS.

    March 23, 2010 at 5:32 am |
1 2