OK, now that the new Congress is in session, I can identify some bills that I can support.
On the subject of consumer credit reform, I support S 3, HR 627/ S 235, and S 255.
On the subject of health care, I support S 4 and HR 15. If HR 15 cannot be enacted, I would accept HR 193 or some similar bill as much better than nothing. But HR 15 is preferable.
None of the bils pesently before Congress on the subject of consumer credit or economic relief provide any direct relief to distressed consumer debtors, and none of them reverse the "reforms" of the bankruptcy bill three years ago that made consumer debts much more difficult to obtain any relief from in bankruptcy (although there is one bill that would allow some additional bankruptcy relief for distressed mortgage debts). However, there is a "sense of Congress" resolution before the Senate, S.3, the "Homeowner Protection and Wall Street Accountability Act," that appears to be calling upon Congress to enact legislation for the relief of consumer debtors, among other things. And there are three bills that would make at least a good start on the kinds of reforms in the consumer credit markets that I was proposing in my post last September: HR 627/ S 235 identical companion bills entitled the "Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2009," and S 255, the "Empowering States' Right to Protect Consumers Act of 2009."
On the subject of health care systems, there are three bills presently before Congress that would appear to be, or to call for, a large step in the right direction, though none of them is perfect.
S 4 is entitled the "Comprehensive Health Reform Act of 2009," but it is really only a "sense of Congress" resolution. However, if Congress actually enacted bills incorporating all of the reforms called for in the resolution, it would take a great step forward.
HR 15, the "National Health Insurance Act," and HR 193, the "AmeriCare Health Care Act of 2009," present alternative models for arriving at something approximating universal coverage. Either one would be a great step forward. In my opinion, HR 15 is a better bill. If I'm reading it correctly, it wouldn't cover quite as many people as HR 193, which is a disadvantage. But it has the strength that it appears to get farther away from the old "insurance" model of health care delivery, with its insistence on strict fee for service payment, and its insistence that individuals bear deductibles and coinsurance payments. In this way, HR 15 appears not only to be friendlier to low- and middle-income people, but also to be more consistent with the much-needed shift to a preventive medicine emphasis. The insurance model requires that medical services be paid for only AFTER the insured "loss" has occurred. HR 15 would permit alternative payment systems--advance contractual retainers and hiring of physicians on salaries to provide care--that are more consistent with prevention of disease.
