MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, finally unveiling his $856 billion health care plan today. Here‘s how "The Washington Post" describes the Baucus plan. "‘It would require nearly all Americans to carry health insurance, while barring insurance companies from discriminating against people based on their health status or denying coverage because of preexisting conditions. The plan does not call for a government-run insurance option, but would set up a system of non-profit consumer-owned cooperatives to compete with the private insurers."

With us now, fresh from the White House, Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon. Senator Wyden, thank you so much for coming, my friend.

SEN. RON WYDEN (D), OREGON: Thank you, Chris.

MATTHEWS: You were just with President Obama. You know what we don‘t know. Where‘s this stand, your position on the bill from Baucus, what the president says, how he‘s going to fix it to meet your needs?

WYDEN: Chris, I always have a rule that I‘ll talk about what I said to a president, but I won‘t get into kind of private comments the president makes back. I and Senator Bennett both made the case for bipartisanship. We think there‘s a natural opportunity. At this point in the United States, Democrats are right that you cannot fix this unless you cover everybody. You‘ve got to have good quality, affordable coverage for everybody or else the uninsured shift their bills to the insured.

But Republicans have some valid points, as well. There ought to be choices. There ought to be markets. You ought to stay away from price controls. And we talked about bipartisanship and bringing Democrats and Republicans together, building from the center of the political spectrum out. And then, of course, we did a little bit of discussion about the Senate Finance Committee next week.

MATTHEWS: Well, let‘s talk about this in a way we haven‘t done it yet. Suppose a person‘s making about $30,000 a year gross income. And they‘re not rich and they‘re providing for a family, but they don‘t have insurance where they work. How will this help them? The bill that comes out from Baucus, where you‘d like to go, where you think the president might go. How are we going to deal with that challenge, the uninsured family making $30,000 or $50,000 a year, somewhere in that range, the reality of American life?

WYDEN: Chris, remember, the bill just came out this morning. And I have this kind of quaint, outdated theory I‘m going to actually read the bill before I get into the specifics. That group of individuals, people who are making about $30,000, if they‘re a family, they‘re going to get a pretty solid subsidy under most of the ideas that Democrats and Republicans are talking about.

The group that I‘m most worried about is a family of four who might be making, say, $66,000. Now, in the earlier drafts, we were told that those folks could be spending up to 13 percent of their income on health care. Then they would have an $8,500 premium, co-payments, deductibles, these kinds of things. They would find a pretty hefty increase, and given these tough economic times, they‘d have real trouble.

Now, the earlier drafts talked about an exemption for those folks, but they don‘t want to be exempt, they want insurance. They want to be able to protect their family.

MATTHEWS: Right.

WYDEN: So, I think the folks that you are talking at $30,000, under most of these bills, will get a pretty generous subsidy. But I‘m very concerned that we are going to see sticker shock among middle-class folks.

MATTHEWS: Right.

WYDEN: They are hurting right-right now. And they are going to need some more relief.

MATTHEWS: Well, who would pay those subsidies for the people who make more? As you say-going with your arithmetic, say a family makes about $60,000 or $70,000. By your arithmetic, 13 percent of that is about $10,000 they would have to pay out. By law, they would have to pay it. They would be required to pay it for insurance.

If they can‘t pay it, who will pay it?

WYDEN: Well...

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: You say someone else should pay it.

WYDEN: At-at stories-at this point, of course, the administration is talking about supporting a bill that would either give those people a big penalty or perhaps an exemption of some sort.

I don‘t think middle-class folks are going to consider that financial security. I would rather have more cost containment. And the way you get real cost containment, what the Budget Office has scored, is by holding insurance companies accountable.

And the way you hold insurance companies accountable is by giving people real choice. In other words, you say, if you don‘t like the policy you have got today, you can go get something else, sort of like members of Congress have.

But the problem with the bills thus far, including what the Finance Committee put out today, is, under that legislation, more than 200 million people wouldn‘t be given a choice, wouldn‘t be given the opportunity to hold the insurance companies accountable. I want them to have that choice. I think it will help us hold down premiums, hold down exposure for taxpayers.

That is what I‘m going to focus on in the Finance Committee.

MATTHEWS: Do you and Senator Bennett of Utah still want to finance this largely by taxing the Cadillac insurance plans?

WYDEN: I certainly think that, if you are talking about folks at Goldman Sachs, who are making $40,000 a year in terms of health benefits, you know, tax-free, that is not-not right. I want them and everybody else to be able to get a generous break on-on their health care, but, certainly, they should not get $40,000, you know, tax-free.

A portion of that ought to be used to try to give a bit of extra relief to the kind of hardworking middle-class folks you and I are talking about.

MATTHEWS: OK. Let‘s talk about the politics of this. You have been in the House. You have been in the Senate. I have known you a long time. You know the Hill.

After all the argument back and forth and the twisting back and forth, will we get 60 votes in the U.S. Senate for a health care bill?

WYDEN: I-I certainly feel that the president‘s timetable of staying at this until it is done right by the end of the year is the right way to go.

I think it is very important for the country to make this a bipartisan effort. If this is essentially all Democrats and perhaps one-one Republican, I don‘t think you have the national kind of consensus you need when you are dealing with one-seventh of the American economy.

One of the points I made to the president today is that I think you ought to be building from the center out. That is what Senator Bennett and I did, saying the Democrats were right on coverage expansion. Republicans had some good points in terms of the markets and the private sector.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

WYDEN: Once you build from the Senate out-the center out, I believe you are on your way to perhaps 68 votes in the United States Senate.

MATTHEWS: Do you believe that there is a good chance that the president will take your approach?

WYDEN: My hope at this point is that it will be possible to export some of the key market-oriented principles from our effort into the Finance Committee legislation.

I would like to see us take some of our principles, like making sure everybody has choices like members of Congress, and include that in the Finance bill.

One of the points I mentioned to the president today is, he always gets tremendous applause at a rally, like he did in Minneapolis on Saturday, when he says that all Americans should get the same deal that members of Congress get.

MATTHEWS: OK.

WYDEN: Unfortunately, in the text of this legislation, 200 million Americans are barred from getting the very pledge the president made to them.

MATTHEWS: OK.

Thank you, Congressman-I mean, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon.

Thank you, sir, for joining us...

WYDEN: Thank you, Chris.