The Washington Post is reporting that the House is now in the middle of an "hours-long" debate over repealing the national health care legislation. In what many surmised would be arguments about doing away with the legislation, the conversation has shifted to examine how the current bill could be reworked. Some Republicans said that elements of the current law — such as a ban on denying coverage for for pre-existing conditions, or the ability of parents to keep young adult children on their insurance — might be included in a replacement bill they want to write.
"We will address, with a replacement bill, pre-existing conditions," said Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.). But Walden said that Republicans wanted to keep out other elements of the overhaul law, which he said included an increase in the overall cost of health care. "We can do better than this, given a chance," Walden said.
Democrats said that they would be willing to change parts of the law. "This is political theater. It's a charade," Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said of the repeal proposal. He continued: "I'm willing to change the bill. But repealing it is the absolutely wrong way of doing it."
We suppose the House Republicans realized that in order to repeal the health care overhaul, the Democrat-controlled Senate would have to approve the repeal, along with the president, which is not going to happen. We suppose the Democrats realized, given the number of people opposing the bill, that some change to the current bill would be politically prudent. Compromise can be a good thing. It will be interesting to see how Democrats and Republicans will modify the current bill. Republicans have not said how they will lower costs, and Democrats have not said that they will budge on requiring all Americans to have health insurance, which Republicans dislike. You have to start somewhere, and talking and listening sure beats shouting and browbeating.
Read more at the Washington Post.
In other news: Piers Morgan to Condi Rice: Are You High Maintenance?