Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(Trigger Talk Is Back) Blue Dog Leader: Public Option Unlikely To Survive Conference Report

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:25 PM
Original message
(Trigger Talk Is Back) Blue Dog Leader: Public Option Unlikely To Survive Conference Report
Blue Dog leader: public option unlikely to survive conference report
Michael O'Brien
August 23, 2009

A public (or "government-run") option in the healthcare bill before Congress is unlikely to survive conference between the House and Senate, a leader of the centrist Blue Dog coalition said this weekend.

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-N.D.) said that while there is a good chance the preliminary House bill will contain the controversial provision, the final bill which will head to the White House probably won't contain the option.

"I think that it will not survive the conference committee," Herseth Sandlin said during an interview with The Daily Republic. She said any version to pass through the House would have to be "structured under very stringent requirements to meet the many concerns that people have about the potential of driving out private companies that would offer plans on the exchange."

Blue Dogs have been reluctant to back the version of the healthcare bill in the House, over concerns about the public option, as well as over some of the taxes used to finance the $1 trillion bill.

Herseth Sandlin did not signal whether she would back healthcare cooperatives, a compromise under consideration by the Senate Finance Committee in order to bring in centrist Democrats' and Republicans' votes for the reform bill.

The South Dakota Democrat, the Blue Dogs' co-chairwoman for administration, said that if the healthcare bill were to have a public option, she would prefer it have a "trigger."

She did predict a more extended timeline for the healthcare debate than those in House and Senate Democratic leadership, who have said that they want to have a bill ready for the president's signature by October.

"I think there will be a real full-court press by the White House to try to get both chambers to act on something just to get it out of the chambers, get it to conference if the Senate Finance Committee can act," she said. "I think you're looking at November, possibly December before something can be signed."

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/08/23/blue-dog-lea... /




From The Daily Republic Mitchell, South Dakota-

...Q: Where do you stand on it (public option)?

A: I would prefer that a public option, if we have one, would have a trigger. I want to take a closer look at the co-op proposal before I take a position on whether I think co-op or a public option with a trigger, with a look back, is the most appropriate mechanism to hold private insurance companies accountable to hold down costs. As I said at the forum, Medicare Part D actually has a trigger for a government-run Medicare Part D option. It hasnt been triggered because thus far, even though we have started to see premiums increase for seniors who take Medicare Part D, they have been able to keep the costs below what was projected. ... Thats why the Blue Dogs put forth in our statement of principles that if we have a public option, were not convinced its necessary. If we have one though, it has to be structured this way you have to carry a reserve. You have to negotiate rates so youre competing fairly and offering true choice in competition. Many Blue Dogs, including myself, want to see how the co-op might be structured. We would be comfortable with a member-owned, nonprofit, member-operated system. I think we still have some work there before I can determine my preference.

http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/36296 /




Who is this woman? I have never heard that she was a Blue Dog leader before. This trigger talk is BS, no trigger, we need a straight up public option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MisterP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. ah, Blue Dems: they'll screw everyone and then scream how much the party needs them n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rusty charly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. And why are
fringe, unknown representatives from the least populated states running the country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Interesting question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yet another concern-laden post....
:boring:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. You find talks of triggers for the public option from Blue Dogs boring?
It's only about the health future of millions of Americans. Don't want people to care too much or probe too deeply?

Is the information incorrect? misleading? unimportant? Says who? You?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Boring! I give this thread only one pom pom!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Nope.
My post was regarding the thread-starter, not (necessarily) the particular subject matter presented in OP.

I know what's at stake. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Ok, explain this to me
This story is datelined today.

the second sentence says: "there is a good chance the preliminary House bill will contain the controversial provision".

WILL contain. Does it contain it right now? WHICH house bill?

Does anyone have an excerpt of EXISTING language concerning the public option in ANY house bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I think that reporting is from this answer of hers
...Q: Have you read the Democrat version of the bill?

A: I have not only read it, but I have gone through, more importantly, a section-by-section analysis of it to understand the implications. We had a five-hour caucus meeting where we raised a number of questions about it. Now since that time, its undergone changes in the Energy and Commerce Committee. So in addition to the meetings Ive been having since I have been home, I have been looking at what changes they may have made in committee but then have to marry it with two other bills in the House. So were going to have to go through the same process when we get back once the chairman and the committee members get back and meld the three bills.

Even then its going to undergo change because people will say, I cant vote for it if it doesnt have that. We have to do more on the employer protection side or we have to do more on cost containment. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. I'm actually happy to hear that.
I was told to give up hope in another thread because that poster said all the bills were in accept for the Finance Committee and there was no hope of getting a real public option into anything at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Yes. There is the CBO report that you can google. And there is the analysis
done by PNHP that quotes directly from HR3200 and from the CBO report. And there is also an analysis of the Senate HELP Bill .
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Plus I believe it's available through through tomas.gov
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200 :

HR3200 is the main (and only to my knowledge) vehicle in the house for the public option. What is in the bill now is estimated to cover 10 million people in ten years (by 2019) and to have no impact at all on the cost of health care because of it's small size.

The HELP Senate Committee bill may be harder to find. It will be merged into whatever the finance committee comes up with. It has what has been trumpeted as a "public option" but the analysis by PNHP says it will create many small regional public options run by insurance companies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. yeah, they're not quite sure that the US health care "dys-system" is falling
apart, they want to wait even longer.... for what? 75 million to be without coverage??

They should spend some time with the US Remote Area group providing care, or better yet, spend a week on an Indian Reservation!

Gees, these totally out of touch people!!!!

Watch Bill Moyers show from Friday if you don't know what it's like not to have coverage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. another representative from a state with nobody in it
I'm beginning to think, in the long run, reform isn't going to come from the Fed, it's going to come state by state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
11. The Houe Blue Dogs don't have the voets to kill a Public Option
but the Congressional Progressive Caucus sure as hell ahs the votes to kill any bill that doesn't have a public option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. I think the Blue Dogs do have the votes to kill a public option.
There are 53 of them, and 40 defections will kill the bill.

The progressives really have no leverage. The blue dogs are perfectly fine with no healthcare reform, and they will happily vote against any plan they don't support. The progressives, on the other hand would be devastated with no healthcare reform. Their threat is not really credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Nov 25th 2014, 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC