>> you can see our full three-hour interview and call-in with author joy hakim live starting now on c-span. >> as just mentioned, the senate at 12:30 eastern will begin day seven of its health care debate. senators are continuing work on an $848 billion version of the bill that would create marketplaces for purchasing health insurance, create a public health insurance option from which states could opt out and require most americans to obtain insurance as well as impose requirements on insurance companies regarding coverage that they offer. a live shot of the capitol here this noon hour in washington d.c. again, 12:30 the senate is in, and this morning we talked to a reporter who's following the story and what's happening today. >> hunter is joining us from congressional quarterly, we are partnering with them as cq, continues to track the health care debate. kate, thanks for being with us. >> guest: thanks for having me. >> host: a republican, olympia snowe of maine, how significant was that? >> guest: well, that's an interesting development because olympia snowe is the only republican so far that's voted for any aspect of these health care overhauls that have been proposed by democrats in congress. and coming out of the finance committee which is where snowe voted for the plan that came out of the finance committee a few months ago, senator snowe said that she would not be onboard with the bill that harry reid unveiled earlier, or i guess last month. so it's interesting that it seems now senator snowe and perhaps even senator collins or a couple of other moderates might be back at the table. >> host: will that meeting continue today? will president obama meet with at least one of the two main senate republicans? >> guest: well, president obama is heading to the hill. there's a 2 p.m. democratic caucus that the president is hoping to attend, is planning to attend. and at that meeting he's going to be trying to bring unity to the democratic caucus, trying to rally the troops. there are 60 democrats, 60 senators who caucus with the democrats in the senate, and the sort of operating mentality at least for the last several weeks is that it's likely to -- if the democrats are able to pass a bill out of the senate, it's likely going to be with support of all members of their caucus, potentially not many republicans. it looks as though because the problem with that is that the democratic caucus is deeply divided over certain aspects of the plan, things like the public option, things like the abortion language, and senator ben nelson of nebraska said last week that he wouldn't support the bill unless there was language that mimics the house-passed abortion language which is very strict. and so given those developments, it looks like there are renewed efforts to bring republicans over to try to get to the 60 votes the democrats are going to need. >> host: as we saw yesterday whether it was the lincoln amendment which would reduce compensation for hospitals and doctors and, also, the dorgan amendment which would allow drugs from canada to come into this country to save money for consumers, will we see more of this in the coming days, the amendment votes? >> guest: yes. the amendment that you referenced is going to have a vote at around 3:15 today. the ensign amendment which likely won't with adopted, but it would reprise an issue that republicans have been hammering on which is the issue of medical malpractice lawsuits. the ensign amendment would issue amounts for attorneys for claimants in medical malpractice lawsuits could receive. those two votes are going -- amendments are going to get a vote today at 3:15. and tomorrow, senator dorgan said yesterday that he expects his amendment, his drug implication amendment, to get a vote -- or, i'm sorry, to begin debate on that tomorrow afternoon. >> host: and finally, kate hunter, when we checked in with you on friday we were talking about the possibility of a full vote in the senate late this week. how likely is that before the christmas holiday? >> guest: well, there's still this week and then next week and then potentially part of the week after that before the christmas holiday. senate democrats have been very adamant that they want to pass a bill out of the senate before the end of the year, and they said last week they'd be willing to work the week between christmas and new year's to do that, however, there seems to be signs of movement behind the scenes even though the floor debate might be on smaller-change amendments, it does seem like the bigger pieces are beginning to come together behind the scenes which could be an early sign that we could be getting a vote sooner than we might have expected. >> host: and finally for you personally as you track this story and follow the movements of the senators, what one story are you following closely today? what will you be looking for? >> guest: i think it'll be interesting to see what kind of movement we see on the public option issue. there's a group of ten senators, ten democrats, moderates and liberals, that are meeting, started meeting on friday privately. and i think any signs that we get that they have come to some kind of an agreement will be really telling because that's one of the main outstanding issues, that this debate can't go forward until that's resofted. >> this is how the washington times characterized it saying that disagreements could threaten the overall health care bill, and they point to a delaware democrat who proposed putting government-run plans in states only where insurance competition is low similar to a compromise plan floated by senator snowe. how realistic are these ideas? >> guest: well, senator carper has been talking about his plan, he floated elements of his plan late last week, and they are similar to what senator snowe has proposed. and from democratic leadership's perspective, it would stand to reason that those are, those are appealing because they could, as you mentioned, potentially bring a republican senator snowe on board with the proposal. however, this group it did look yesterday like this group of ten senator that are meeting behind closes doored, like what they're discussing is somewhere more along the line of a series of plans that would be run by nonprofits, it'd be national in scope, but they'd be administered by the office of personnel management. and that would seem to have some appeal to both sides in the sense that moderates would potentially like the fact that it's not -- the public plan isn't being administered bear the department of health and human services and liberals might like the fact that it's still being administered by a government entity. so that seems like it could potentially provide a pass forward, but we'll have to wait and see what they coalesce around. >> host: kate hunter who writes for congressional quarterly, and our viewers can check out her work at congress.org. we'll continue to get updates from cq, kate hunter, thanks for being with us. >> guest: thank you. >> and, again, we'll have live coverage when the senate gavels in at 12:30 ian -- eastern here on c-span. >> now, in depth, normally seen at this time here on c-span too is live, now, on c-span, and we are talking today with author joy health care akdhakim. she is the author of the three-volume history, the story of science. other books include history of the u.s. she's a former teacher, a newspaper editorial writer for the virginian pilot, and again, in depth today on our companion network, c-span. back on capitol hill, senators getting ready to continue debate on health care with a number of amendments being offered. two are scheduled for votes in the 3:00 hour this afternoon, right now scheduled for 3:15 eastern. one by nevada republican john ensign to limit the fees plaintiffs' attorneys can collect in medical malpractice lawsuits. and another amendment offered by arkansas democrat blanche lincoln would limit the amount insurance companies can collect. here's a look. >> mr. president? >> senator from arkansas. >> well, thank you, mr. president, and i am very proud to come and join in this debate on an issue i do think is absolutely critical to all our kansans and all americans. i'd like to compliment chairman baucus because as we talk about this issue in term thes of health care reform, clearly our delivery system in health care is broken. we've got the best hospitals and doctors, research and technologies in the world, and yet our delivery system is broken. and for the last 24 months the senate finance committee has held hearings and round tables, summits, all kinds of different deliberative efforts working in partnership with the associations that represent our providers, advocacy groups on behalf of patients, anybody that would come to the table to talk about how is it that we reform this system and make it better for the constituents that we serve, the patients that are the ultimate recipient of the health care system in this country? and i just applaud him and the work that we've done there. so to anyone that says we're just jumping in here and moving too fast or, you know, i have tremendous respect for the minority leader from kentucky. my husband trained at kentucky, did his subspecialty there, and one of his admiration for one of those he trained with, the good friend of senator mcconnell. but the minority leader's comment that we're just simply saying to our constituents, shut down and shut up, again, like the comment from the senator from tennessee that we're throwing seniors under the bus, we're in a body that is here to be respectful of one another, respectful of our differences, our different approaches, how we come to the ideas that we have of how we solve these questions. and the senator from massachusetts brings up a great point, where are the suggestions from the other side of how we solve this? coming to the table, are they going to come to the table with ideas of how we do something other than just going with the status quo? because clearly americans understand that we're not throwing them under the bus, we're trying to figure out how is it that we preserve medicare that's going to go bankrupt in 2017? how do we make the difference in the delivery system so we bring down those long-term costs in health care so that we can actually preserve the programs that work and that are so meaningful to people in their lives? i would just say that as we come to this debate i hope we will continue the age-old attitude in the united states senate of being respectful for one another's views and one another's efforts. in trying to really bring about something that is going to make sense and that's going to be helpful. not throwing people under the bus, not telling constituents to sit down and shut up, but actually working hard to come up with some solutions. i notice that my mother actually senator mccain was trying to call an awful lot of people in arkansas. my mother was one of those that he tried to get in touch with to really tell them that something's wrong up here, and we're not doing what we need to do. i certainly visit with my mom an awful lot and hear about her experiences and the concerns she has about medicare which is a system that is great for her, and i'm proud that i live in a country that provides her with that kind of care. and she does believe, very strongly, in some of the things that she's seen in her medicare bill, things that could -- inefficiencies that could be changed, ways that we could make it a better program. so i hope that we will all come to the table here with good ideas and ways that we really can make a difference. and i notice that there was an effort or certainly a concern about wanting to add people to my amendment. i would welcome the republicans, if they would like to offer their own amendment, to include other entities. and if they would like to do that, i've worked on my amendment, and i like my amendment the way it is, i think it really focuses on industries whose sole purpose is to o provide health insurance. their sole purpose is to provide health insurance. so if they want to add other people, no, i'm sorry, i'm going to continue visiting for just a moment, then i'll let you all take time on your part. but i'm just directing solely on those businesses whose only purpose is to provide health insurance for the people of this country. and i'll just use an example of an article that came out yesterday. it represents, basically, one of our larger national insurance companies that are working hard, i think -- at least i hope they are -- to do what's right, and yet i look that they are going to be dumping 600,000-plus customers because they don't think their profits are big enough. and yet i look at the record, and i believe that their ceo actually in 2008 made over $24 million. now, if they can pay their top executive $24 million last year, but they're going to complain that their profits are not big enough, then they've got to dump patients. i would just ask my colleagues where do we go to correct this imbalance? if it is not to -- a very plausible amendment, it certainly doesn't restrict the pending amendment which is mine, it doesn't restrict what industries, corporations can provide or give their executives in pay. what it does do is it says that we are not going to subsidize that with tax dollars. the very american taxpayers that they're dumping are the ones that are subsidizing those incredible executive pay amendments. -- amounts. so i would just say to my friends over there, and i have to say those over there that are defending the status quo on behalf of health insurance companies and their executives that are receiving these multimillion dollar compensation packages, you know, it took nine of 'em at one time. so it's a tough lift to be able to defend these executive compensations for insurance company executives or otherwise nine of 'em wouldn't have been down here trying to shift the conversation to something else. but i just think, mr. president, that the american people do understand that that is out of balance and that here we are at an opportunity to provide these insurance companies even more customers. we just simply want to be reassured that we are not through taxpayers' dollars subsidizing these enormous executive amounts, compensation amounts, and more importantly, that the savings that come from that are going to go into the medicare trust fund to shore it up. so i just, i appreciate everyone's debate and their efforts to come to the floor today and really talk about a critical issue to folks. you know, i just would remind, again, mr. president, all of my colleagues current law allows all businesses, all businesses to deduct up to $1 million annually per executive as a business expense. that's a million dollar tax break per executive, per company that is sub si ciezed -- subsidized by the taxpayers. and there's multiple more ways that they can, obviously, provide greater compensation, and there's lots of loopholes in there that allows them to, again, get tax subsidies for more compensation for their executives. but my proposal would limit this amount to $400,000. the very amount that the highest public official in this land gets paid, the president. $400,000 salary for those health insurance companies that will profit -- they will profit, mr. president, as a result of the health insurance reform. because our objective is to get more people insured. and so working diligently through all of these technicalities trying to get more people insured, we are creating a new marketplace for them with more consumers, a tremendous amount. but this is only in regard to health insurance companies. it doesn't dictate, again, what a business can pay an employee, but it does limit the taxpayer subsidies for the compensation. this is a fair policy, mr. president, it's aimed at encouraging our health insurance companies to put premium dollars towards lower rates and more affordable coverage, not into their pocketbook. they're complaining about profits, and yet they're still paying these executives a tremendous amount of money. to be sure, there is evidence these companies need the encouragement to do the right thing for consumers. health insurers spent more than 90 cents per every dollar on patient care in the early 1990s, that number has decreased to just over 80 cents per dollar for every dollar. now, for every dollar they spend only 80 cents of it goes back into their efforts to provide coverage for their consumers. and that is in 2007. those are the numbers that we have. according to the testimony delivered to the senate commerce committee earlier this year, this trend has translated into a difference of several billion dollars. in favor of insurance company shareholders and executives at the expense of health care providers and their patients. so it is imperative that we do what we can to reverse that trend, particularly now when millions more americans will be purchasing their health insurance coverage as a result of this health reform package. taxpayers are footing the bill for this subsidy, and we must take steps to deter the health insurance companies from further enhancing their profit margins at the expense of the american people. those defending the status quo, again, i just want to point out that we've had a lot of senators that came to the floor this morning on the republican side to defend the status quo on behalf of the health insurance companies and their executives that are receiving these multimillion dollar compensation packages. i would just say that maybe they don't understand that under that current law right now the american people are already footing the bill for this tax windfall for health insurance executive pay. so as we move forward, it's just going to be a greater benefit to those executive thes and the ability for these insurance companies to be able to do that. we want to keep those insurance companies in business. we want to make sure that they're there as providers. but it's just a disconnect when they say they've got to cut 600,000 of their, of their insured under the current system because their profits aren't high enough, and yet they're paying their top executive a $24 billion compensation package. it is subsidized by the taxpayers. so i just hope that we will work together to figure out what is the right place to be here, if what we want to do is to really make sure that we're reforming health care, and we're asking everybody to come to the table and make an effort in putting ourselves back on track. because ultimately, you know, we want that quality of life that a new reformed health insurance and health care-providing delivery system can provide, but we also want to make sure that we strengthen our economy. and making sure that we make use, good use, good use of every medical dollar. that we're getting the biggest bang for that buck. it's a critical part of putting our economy back on track. the assumption that's been based on the other side, i think, has basically been based, also, prime mr. president, on the current and broken marketplace where insurance companies really do bully their customers and monopolize their choices. i don't know about their phones, but i hear a lot from my constituents, you know, that they can't get insurance. i've got a neighbor, a hard working woman who's a single mom, can't get insurance because of a pre-existing condition. you know, i've got others who have had insurance, and then when they did become ill, they got dropped. so, you know, our hope is that we look at this in the context not of the broken marketplace that exists today, but of what we're trying to create. and that is a more robust marketplace and one that make sense both for insurance companies, but for consumers as well. with the insurance market reforms we plan to implement along with the more c