But he said there was no final agreement.
“This is one of those situations where it’s probably best for everybody to sleep on it,” Mr. Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, said as he left the office of the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, at 9:40 p.m.
Senate Democratic leaders and White House officials met through the day with Mr. Nelson, whom they see as the indispensable 60th vote for the legislation.
One of their goals was to tighten restrictions on the use of federal money to subsidize insurance that includes coverage for abortions.
Republicans have said they will use every tool to block the bill. Under Senate rules, Mr. Reid must finish writing the legislation by Saturday, or it would be virtually impossible for Democrats to get the bill approved by their self-imposed Christmas deadline.
“We are still talking and will have some more conversations tomorrow,” Mr. Nelson said Friday night. At this stage, there is “certainly nothing final,” he said, but, “sure, there is progress.”
James P. Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said: “Today was a day of long, hard negotiations involving a number of issues and a number of senators. We have made great progress and are pleased with how the discussions have proceeded.”
Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, a leading proponent of abortion rights, was also in the talks.
Mr. Nelson said his concerns went beyond abortion and included other provisions, like cuts in Medicare payments to nursing homes and home care agencies.
The talks played out in an atmosphere embittered by a dispute over a military spending bill.
Democrats said the Republicans had forced a lengthy debate on the Defense Department bill, in part because they wanted to block the health bill, which is next in line for a Senate vote. Republicans said Democrats were trying to jam the health bill through the Senate before anyone had read its new provisions.
Senator Bob Casey, Democrat of Pennsylvania, has been trying for several days to work out a compromise on abortion. Under his proposal, some health plans receiving federal subsidies could offer coverage for abortion, but they could not use federal money to pay for the procedure. They would have to use money taken from premiums paid by subscribers and would have to keep it separate from federal money.
Mr. Nelson and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said Thursday that they could not accept Mr. Casey’s initial proposal, in part because they saw money from the government and premiums as fungible.
The White House tried Friday to suggest that religious groups were divided, and that some Roman Catholic organizations were more flexible and more willing to compromise than the bishops.
Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, which represents Catholic hospitals, praised Mr. Casey’s efforts. “As we understand it, the Senate intends to keep the president’s commitment that no federal funds will pay for abortions,” she said. “We are increasingly confident that Senator Casey’s language can achieve the objective of no federal funding for abortion.”
But Richard M. Doerflinger, a spokesman on abortion for the bishops’ conference, called the proposed compromise unacceptable. “I do not see anything to address the core problem, which is the use of federal funds to subsidize health plans that include coverage of abortion,” he said.
The bishops’ position, he said, is that “if a health plan receives federal money, it cannot cover elective abortion.”
Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, the archbishop of Galveston-Houston and chairman of the bishops’ anti-abortion committee, said, “We continue to oppose, and urge others to oppose, the Senate bill unless and until this fundamental failure is remedied.”
Several Democratic senators said they were rethinking Mr. Reid’s Christmas deadline for action on the health care bill.
Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said he would be pleased if the Senate made significant progress toward passage of the bill, or approved “critical components,” by Christmas. He said he was confident that the Senate would eventually approve the bill.
Democrats in Congress and the administration want Congress to finish work on the bill before the president gives his State of the Union address in January , so they can pivot to an emphasis on jobs and the economy.
Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican being courted by the White House, said she had concerns about several of the bill’s provisions, including an increase in the Medicare payroll tax and the creation of a federal insurance program for long-term care. Given these concerns, Ms. Snowe said, it is “totally unrealistic” for Senate Democratic leaders to insist on passing the bill by Christmas.
“Why are we rushing to get this done?” Ms. Snowe asked. “We should take a pause, cool the passions and work deliberately through a number of these issues.”
Labor unions said the Senate bill needed major changes.
Richard L. Trumka, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., said the bill was “inadequate — too kind to the insurance industry.” He deplored the Democrats’ decision to jettison a government-run health plan that would compete with private insurers.
Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, urged President Obama to fight for improvements in the Senate bill.
Mr. Stern praised provisions that would provide coverage to more than 30 million uninsured people. But in a letter to members of his union, he also said: “For many people, care will still be too expensive to afford. Some of you would face an additional burden because your health insurance benefits would be taxed.”
Some Democrats have suggested that the Senate should pass the bill next week and fix problems in negotiations with the House. But the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said: “The bill is beyond fixing. It’s not fixable.”
Moreover, Mr. McConnell said: “There’s a good chance the Democrats will not be able to get their members to lock arms and walk off the cliff in obvious defiance of the American people, who are virtually screaming at us, ‘Please do not pass this bill.’ ”
No comments:
Post a Comment