With both health reform bills in Congress now law, the focus turns in Congress to the public relations battle between Democrats and their critics, as each side tries to get the upper hand in the next phase of this health debate.

Mention the name of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) the past few days and you quickly see critical comments from opponents of health reform, irked by Waxman's move to schedule a hearing on April 21 with companies that announced big financial write-downs as a result of the new health law.

Basically, Democrats have asked Caterpillar, AT&T, Verizon and Deere & Co. to explain why they are planning for such large write-downs - the companies say it's because of a tax provision that will make it cost a lot more to provide prescription drug coverage to retired workers.

First, let's look at the issue at hand.  In the new health law, there is a provision in Section 9012, "Elimination of deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare Part D subsidy."

This provision deals with a tax break that was provided in the 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug law, which gave a boost to companies that kept providing drug coverage for their retirees, instead of dumping them onto the Medicare rolls.

The new health law would get rid of that tax break, beginning in 2013 (it was originally 2011 in the Senate passed health bill, but was delayed in the health care reconciliation bill.)

How much money is involved here?  A lot according to big companies like AT&T, which recently announced it would take a $1 billion charge against future earnings because of this tax change.

Before giving a speech yesterday in Atlanta to Georgia Power, a division of the Southern Company, I spoke with someone who was familiar with this provision, as he said the calculations involved for companies are pretty straightforward.  

So for the sake of argument, let's take AT&T and other companies at their word about how much this will cost them.  Billions of dollars is their quick answer.

That must mean this tax provision is a big revenue raiser for the health care reform law.

But that is not supported by cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation in the Congress.

This provision, "Eliminate deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare Part D subsidy" is estimated to raise $4.5 billion over eight years.

In 2013, the first year it goes into effect, the feds would get $400 million in new revenues.  The estimate is $600 million in 2014.  

Now, you probably can't compare AT&T's $1 billion exactly to that $1 billion in federal revenue, but it's still an interesting comparison because of the high priced financial estimates coming from AT&T and other big companies right now.

This skirmish will also give us a good example of how the PR battle is going to be fought out on health care reform, another version of Business vs Democrats.  

With Waxman moving aggressively to call a hearing on the matter, Democrats have signaled that they are not going to sit idly by as critics raise questions about the health law.  Of course, many critics see Waxman and Democrats trying to bully opponents into keeping their mouths shut.

April 21 is the hearing date.  We'll see what kind of cost estimates and analyses the companies offer up and how the Democrats dissect them.

It's a reminder that this health reform battle is into a different phase, but one that will still be in the political headlines.