
One thing that’s clear from reading today’s news is that Representative Mike Ross (D-AR) is very upset about the House health care bill and is planning to lead a bloc of Blue Dog Dems on the Energy & Commerce Committee to vote against it unless major changes happen. It’s also clear that said bloc is in fact large enough to join with the Republicans and kill reform. What’s not at all clear is what exactly Ross’ objections are. CNN’s report says Ross “didn’t give details on changes the Blue Dogs want.” Politico’s report, likewise, has no information about what Ross actually wants to see happen. He just says there should be “drastic changes.”
Fortunately, thanks to the internet I can sit here in DC and read Arkansas News’ coverage where they have more actual information about Rep Ross’s moment in the sun. Apparently these are the key bullets:
— The cost of health care reform, both for the explosion in the deficit they fear and the dearth of real savings for consumers they also fear.
— Whether to have a public plan and if so, how to design it. The Blue Dogs prefer it as a trigger if cost-reduction targets aren’t met and they do not want a reimbursement schedule like Medicare’s, which is less for rural areas. Actually, they want to change the Medicare schedule. The bill as written gives them a study commission, probably a mere brush-off. Is there a contradiction in the Blue Dogs, worrying about costs and then trying to jack up Medicare? Sure.
— Employer mandates, either to provide health care to employees or pay a fee. The Blue Dogs like the exemption for small businesses. But they don’t think it goes high enough in terms of payroll and employees. They want to expand it.
— And there’s the whole respect thing, with the Blue Dogs tired of being forced left by Pelosi while the Senate goes a more moderate way.
In other words, they’re concerned that the bill (a) costs too much overall and (b) will increase the deficit. And their proposed solutions to this are to (a) increase the cost of the bill by neutering the public plan and (b) decrease the quantity of revenue by fiddling with the employer mandate. Under the circumstances, it’s no wonder that Ross didn’t want to go into detail with CNN about how he’d propose changing the bill. Maybe Harry Potter knows a spell that could untie this mess of contradictions.
Previous in TP Yglesias

By clicking and submitting a comment I acknowledge the ThinkProgress Privacy Policy and agree to the ThinkProgress Terms of Use. I understand that my comments are also being governed by Facebook's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.