Published: November 06, 2009 10:58 pm      

Donnelly mum on health-care bill

Congressman one of three Indiana undecideds Friday.

Hoosiers have known for weeks that Indiana’s Republican congressional delegation won’t vote for health-care reform, but they’re still waiting to hear what the Democrats will do.

Friday, U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Granger, was still officially undecided, even as House Democratic leadership scrambled for the needed 218 votes.

Donnelly press secretary Samantha Slater said Donnelly was involved in intensive meetings with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Friday, in an attempt to add specific anti-abortion funding language to the massive bill.

Slater said it was possible Donnelly, who has come under tremendous pressure as a vote approaches, won’t publicly discuss his position on the bill until after the vote is cast.

Tuesday, Donnelly issued a statement, saying he was reading through the bill.

“Now that we have a final health-care reform bill, I am reading it in its entirety and weighing it against concerns, criticisms and ideas that have been shared with me over the past months,” Donnelly said in the statement. “I understand that this legislation will affect every Hoosier, which is why it’s so important to me to get it right.”

Democrat leaders acknowledged Friday morning that intra-party disputes over abortion funding and illegal immigrants’ access to health care were still brewing, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, said his party was still short of the 218 votes needed to pass the bill.

“There are many people who are still trying to get a comfort level that this is the right thing to do,” he said. “We’re very close.”

While Hoyer said he still expects a vote Saturday evening, he said he has put lawmakers on notice they may be called to the House floor Sunday afternoon, or even Monday or Tuesday.

The House is considering passage of a 10-year, $1.2 trillion bill which would extend health coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and put new restrictions on insurance companies.

Federal law now bars government funds from being used to pay for abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. The health-care bill would create a new stream of federal money to subsidize medical insurance premiums, and the dispute is over how to apply the abortion restrictions to those funds.

Abortion opponents say language now in the bill is inadequate to ensure that only private dollars — not federal funds — can be used to pay for the procedure. Abortion rights supporters say if the bill gets much more restrictive, it would deny women access to a procedure now covered by many private insurance plans.

In addition to the concern over abortion funding, Donnelly said he has several specific requirements for any final bill.

Donnelly didn’t rule out support for the so-called “public option” but said any bill he would support would have to be deficit neutral, and would have to lower health insurance costs.

Opponents of the House bill have claimed it would increase insurance premiums, and would add significantly to the growing national debt.

The bill would cover 96 percent of Americans, providing government subsidies beginning in 2013 to extend coverage to millions who now lack it. Self-employed people and small businesses could buy coverage through the new exchanges, either from a private insurer or a new government plan that would compete. All the plans sold through the exchange would have to follow basic consumer protection rules.

For the first time, almost all individuals would be required to purchase insurance or pay a fine, and employers would be required to insure their employees. Insurance companies would be barred from denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions or charging much higher rates to older people.

• Scott Smith is a Kokomo Tribune staff writer. He may be reached at 765-454-8569 or via e-mail at scott.smith@kokomotribune.com