CHARLESTON -- Jackie Henry of Charleston isn’t living the retirement she expected.

Henry has a chronic lung condition. Her husband was diagnosed with a tumor in his heart. Both take medications for their conditions. While both are covered by Medicare, the couple must pay the full price for their prescriptions because they fall into the so-called “doughnut hole” coverage gap in the program.

As a result, they have burned through their retirement savings and face the prospect of paying hundreds of dollars for medicines every month. Henry’s husband has gone back to work.

“We’ve had to really cut down on living expenses,” she said. “Our utility bills are sometimes late. We just don’t do anything — we have to pay for medicine.”

Henry was one example AARP West Virginia used to show why it and its parent organization endorsed the health care reform bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 7.

The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act is one of three major pieces of health care legislation being considered by Congress and arguably one of the most far-reaching in terms of reform. It would include a public insurance option to compete with private insurers, although one that wouldn’t negotiate with medical providers to set rates, as some had wanted.

It also would close the doughnut hole and expand Medicaid coverage for the poor. Some Medicare recipients would see cuts in coverage, although AARP argues the changes actually would strengthen and improve the program.

The endorsement of the House bill by the AARP was a boon for the bill’s supporters given the organization is one of the most influential lobbying groups in the nation. And that same day the American Medical Association also gave it an endorsement, although under the condition lawmakers also pass a bill that canceled cuts to physician payments under Medicare.

AARP was looking for several reforms in a health care bill, according to Gaylene Miller, senior state director of AARP West Virginia. It wanted a bill to close the doughnut hole in Medicare coverage for many seniors; eliminate the use of pre-existing conditions to deny coverage; limit the costs of health policies to senior citizens to twice that of younger people; and allow the government to negotiate with drug companies for lower drug prices in Medicare.

“After reviewing all three of those legislative proposals that are currently before Congress, by far and away the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act meets those priorities,” Miller said.

Not everyone welcomed passage of the legislation. The West Virginia Chamber of Commerce said in a statement that its members are worried about language requiring employers to provide health coverage and creating penalties for businesses and individuals without insurance.

“The bill … poses serious consequences for the employer community by drastically increasing taxes and imposing mandates without addressing fundamental problems with affordability and access,” the Chamber stated in a news release. “The Chamber, however, believes that health delivery reforms and cost-controls are needed.”

The House bill passed the chamber on a 220-215 vote. West Virginia’s delegation voted along party lines, with its two Democratic members — Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall — voting in favor of the bill. Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia’s lone Republican in Washington, D.C., voted against it.

But some Democrats didn’t get everything they wanted. The bill prohibits a government-run insurance program from providing money for abortions. That made the legislation more palatable to conservative Democrats such as Rahall. “I have been a pro-life member of Congress since I was first elected in 1976,” Rahall said in a news release. “I believe in the sanctity of life for those of all ages — young and old — and I believe that every life deserves to be saved, which is why I voted in favor of H.R., 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act.”

Mollohan pointed to the large number of uninsured in his district as a major reason he voted in favor of the bill. “This legislation would give all of our citizens access to affordable health care, contain escalating health care costs that threaten our economic recovery and improve Medicare prescription drug benefits for our seniors,” he said.

Capito largely echoed the concerns of her fellow Republicans in voicing her opposition to the legislation, saying it was being rushed through without full consideration of the consequences.

“Legislation that touches every single American and would reform nearly one-sixth of our economy demands transparency and consensus,” she said in a news release. “Unfortunately, (Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.) and our friends on the other side of the aisle chose to openly reject any semblance of bipartisanship in favor of a bill that will cost well over a trillion dollars, raise taxes on job-creating small businesses and cut nearly $400 billion from Medicare and Medicaid.”

Capito also asked the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources to estimate how much the bill would cost the state in terms of Medicaid expansion given that states must match federal dollars directed at them for the program.

Medicaid expansion has been a touchy subject for state governors given most states are facing huge financial difficulties. Gov. Joe Manchin has given mixed signals about his feelings on the proposal, expressing both concern about the cost and optimism the expansion will reduce costs for uncompensated care.

Matt Turner, the governor’s spokesman, noted the governor still is worried about the potential financial impact on the state.

“It’s something we’ll have to evaluate, and we will continue to review its impact as the bill is finalized,” Turner wrote in an e-mail. “Right now, however, it’s too early to determine whether (Manchin) would fully support it.”

Passage of the House bill is far from the final say on the matter.

The U.S. Senate is considering two health care proposals that will likely be merged together before they are passed.

Once the Senate has passed a bill, both the House and Senate versions will head into a conference committee that will meld both bills into a single piece of legislation.