Ruth Marcus puts in a good word on behalf of Wyden-Bennett:
The first, which would, in a more perfect world, be my preference, is the measure devised by the odd couple of the Senate, Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon and Republican Robert Bennett of Utah. This bill not only has the merit of being demonstrably bipartisan but has been scored by the Congressional Budget Office as fully paid for.
The problem is that the Wyden-Bennett plan would essentially blow up the existing, although rickety, system of employer-sponsored insurance, which is both the substantive attraction and the political drawback.
while also saying nice things about the proposal made by former Sens. Tom Daschle, Bob Dole, and Howard Baker:
The group finessed one hot-button issue, whether there should be a public plan to compete with private insurers, by giving states the option of establishing their own public plans and providing for the option of a federal plan if state-level efforts don’t work.
It further ticked off Democratic allies — especially labor unions — by proposing to limit the amount of health insurance that employers can provide tax-free; cleverly, the cap would be linked to the value of the federal insurance plan, and the sting would be reduced by exempting retirees and those covered by existing labor agreements.
Republicans, for their part, would have to swallow not only a mandate that individuals purchase insurance but also a requirement that employers offer coverage or pay a certain percentage of their payroll (maximum 3 percent, compared with 8 percent in the House bill). The proposal would also subsidize premiums for families earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level — $88,000 for a family of four.
I’d prefer either of those two proposals to either the House or Senate bill.
