Winners and losers in the Senate bill:

[cali]

<snip>


WINNERS

_Cosmetic surgeons, who fended off a 5 percent tax on their procedures.

_Nebraska, Louisiana, Vermont and Massachusetts. These states are getting more federal help paying for a proposed Medicaid expansion than other states are. In the case of Nebraska—represented by Sen. Ben Nelson, who's providing the critical 60th vote for the legislation to pass—the federal government is picking up 100 percent of the tab for the expansion, in perpetuity.

_Beneficiaries of Medicare Advantage plans—the private managed-care plans within Medicare—in Florida. Hundreds of thousands of them will have their benefits grandfathered in thanks to a provision tailored by Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., that also affects a much smaller number of seniors in a few other states.

_Longshoremen. They were added to the list of workers in high-risk professions who are shielded from the full impact of a proposed new tax on high-value insurance plans.

_Community health centers. They got $10 billion more in the revised bill, thanks to advocacy by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

_A handful of physician-owned hospitals being built around the country—including one in Bellevue, Neb.—which would be permitted to get referrals from the doctors who own them, avoiding a new ban in the Senate bill that will apply to hospitals built in the future. Without mentioning Nebraska or other states by name, the Senate bill pushes back some legal deadlines by several months, in effect making a few hospitals that are near completion eligible to continue receiving referrals from the doctors who own them. Chalk up another win for Nelson.

_AARP, the lobby for elderly people. The new Democratic bill has about $1 billion in extra Medicaid payments to states that provide visiting nurses and other in-home or community services to prevent low-income people from needing to be admitted to hospitals. In House-Senate bargaining, AARP also is expected to win one of their top priorities: a full closing of the so-called "doughnut hole," the gap in Medicare's coverage of prescription drugs.

LOSERS

_Tanning salons, which are getting hit with a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning services, replacing the cosmetic surgery tax.

_Progressives. They had to give up on their long-held dream of a new government-run insurance plan so that Democratic leaders could lock down the necessary votes from moderates.

_People making over $200,000 a year. A proposed 0.5 percent increase in the Medicare payroll tax was bumped up to 0.9 percent in the latest version, putting the tax at 2.35 percent on income over $200,000 a year for individuals, $250,000 for couples.

_Generic drug makers. They fought unsuccessfully to block 12 years of protection that makers of brand-name biotech drugs—expensive pharmaceuticals made from living cells—will get against generic would-be competitors.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CN9J5O4&show_article=1&catnum=0

[midnight]

1. Extra Medicaid payments is why my Sen. if voting for this bill.....

AARP, the lobby for elderly people. The new Democratic bill has about $1 billion in extra Medicaid payments to states that provide visiting nurses and other in-home or community services to prevent low-income people from needing to be admitted to hospitals. In House-Senate bargaining, AARP also is expected to win one of their top priorities: a full closing of the so-called "doughnut hole," the gap in Medicare's coverage of prescription drugs.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

2. Cool. Thanks for the information. I'm eager to learn all I can.

[jefferson_dem]

3. Like it or not, Reid and Durbin are big winners.

They kept the entire caucus unified in support. All 58 plus Holy Joe and Sanders. Not an easy task.

And how are teabaggers and hate radio NOT losers?

[karynnj]

9. True - in addition, Baucus looks better now than I thought possible

when I, like most here, were completely frustrated with him and his gang of 6. Obviously, Dodd and Harkin did a very good job with the HELP committee. Durbin last night mentioned that the bill had many authors. This bill is so comprehensive and has so many pieces, that there are many major components, sponsored by these or other Senators that alone will have more impact that many stand alone pieces of legislation.

I think the other BIG losers are all the RW organizations that funded the constant ads that have tried to swiftboat the plan, by lying about what it is. I am one who rarely uses that word, as I think the 2004 action was unusual and unique in its dishonesty and its ugliness. As in 2004, many cable new people, not just on FOX, were hostile to significant legislation passing.

I agree with you that the teabaggers and their hate radio masters are also very likely big losers here. I use the conditional "likely" only because I don't think they are through yet. In his Senate Speech, McCain quoted John Paul Stevens, saying he had only begun to fight. Even after this passes, they will continue to try to demonize it and use it for political gains.

Another loser is AHIP. The fact that an AHIP representative was on for a considerable time on CNN after the Senate vote (I turned hoping to get a triumphant story - *sigh*, but rather than key Senators, administration people or staffers, they had an AHIP representative. Now it was the middle of the night, but I bet there were some who worked for this awake as well.) One key thing to watch going forward is that some regulation, especially things like all the customer protection rules (not dropping, not discriminating) and the cost ones (ie requiring 80 - 85% of premiums to go to health care) are rigorously enforced.

Though a completely different matter, one surprising thing I learned froom the Kerrys' environmental book was that many of the environmental disasters, their heros confronted were already prohibited by existing law. All the same, the heros often fought for years to get the law enforced. If it is well enforced, it will greatly increase regulation of the insurance companies.

[Laelth]

4. Add two groups to the list of LOSERS

1) The uninsured middle class (who will be ordered to pay up to 12% of their gross income to the health insurance cabal).

2) The Democratic Party (which will be punished severely by the electorate if they push through this bill--polls show a majority of Americans oppose the individual mandate).

This bill is worse than doing nothing.

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[cali]

5. those are predictions. I hope you're wrong.

[Laelth]

6. One is a prediction, and I hope I am wrong too.

The other is fact, and a direct breach of Obama's campaign promise not to raise taxes on the middle class. The individual mandate is a huge, back-door tax increase on the struggling middle class.

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[cali]

7. Not if there are meaningful subsidies. n/t

[Laelth]

8. That's just not true, unless the subsidies are 100%.

Otherwise, it's a tax increase.

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[cali]

10. that makes no sense