Senate Democrats watering down the public option: "It's not the public option you think"

Better Believe It

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-13-09 09:27 PM
Original message

Senate Democrats watering down the public option: "It's not the public option you think"

Watering down the public option
By CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN
October 10, 2009

Senate Democrats are growing increasingly bold in predicting a public health insurance option will pass Congress this year, defying months of pessimism and outright opposition from party moderates.

But it�s not the �public option� you think.

Groping for a way out of a political bind, Democrats are defining down what constitutes a government-run insurance plan � and by extension, what it takes to declare victory.

At this point, Senate Democrats are signaling they could get behind just about anything they could plausibly call the public option �from a �trigger� that could kick in a public insurance plan later, to Delaware Sen. Tom Carper�s proposal to give states an option to create a government program.

�It�s a tried-and-true legislative strategy for getting everyone to �yes,� � said a Democratic strategist familiar with congressional leadership strategy. �Narrow your differences by broadening the definition of what constitutes success.�

The Democrats haven�t exactly been subtle in this move-the-goalposts effort.

This doctrine of maximum flexibility originated in the White House, as the president and his aides frustrated Democratic activists for months with their refusal to specify what exactly �public option� means. But it wasn�t until the past week or so, as alternatives to the traditional public option emerged, that more Senate Democrats began to acknowledge a new point of reference.

Senate Democrats are defining down what constitutes a public plan -- and what it takes to declare victory.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28153.html

-------------------------------------------

Good Day For Baucus, Bad Day For Real Reform
By Jon Walker
October 13, 2009

I�m sure Chairman Baucus, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and President Obama are all pleased that Republican senator Olympia Snowe voted for the Baucus bill in committee. Their goals have long been to pass anything they could slap the label �health care reform� on and declare victory. Sadly, Snowe�s support could signal a bad day for real reform.

Snowe has long been opposed to some of the most important elements of reform. I�m not just referring to her opposition to a real public option and her support for a worthless trigger proposal.

Snowe opposes a real employer mandate, and instead favors a disastrously stupid �free rider� provision. It could have serious consequences for low-income workers.

She is against giving the exchanges the power to negotiate with private insurance companies. This is a provision that should help keep down the cost of health care. It would save individuals money and the government money. Snowe fears it is too much government involvement. John Kingsdale, who runs Massachusetts�s exchange, called Snowe�s insistence that the exchanges not have the power to negotiate price with insurance companies a recipe for disaster.

Just today, during the committee hearing, she reaffirmed her support for �national plans.� This would allow health insurance companies to sell national plans in any states. Individuals state would lose the power to regulate these insurance plans sold in their states. The national plans would be exempt from all minimum benefit requirements mandated by the state legislature. This has been for a long time one of the top goals of the for-profit health insurance industry.

Please read the complete article at:

http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/good-day-for-baucus-bad-day-for-real-reform/

--------------------------------------------

She May Be on the Other Team, But She Called All the Plays
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
October 14, 2009

Sen. Olympia Snowe, Republican of Maine, is fast becoming the Brett Favre of the political world: She has trouble making up her mind, but she sure knows how to play ball.

Congress's answer to Favre is Snowe, the wiry New Englander who, for the past several months, has been unable -- or unwilling -- to take a position on health-care legislation. The longer she held out, the more concessions Democrats made to win her over, to the point where she became, arguably, the single most influential member of Congress drafting the legislation, even though she is a member of the minority party.

Democrats negotiated with her for months; President Obama wooed her personally. Olympia wants amendments? She gets amendments. Olympia needs more time? The Senate Finance Committee delays its vote. Olympia opposes government-run insurance? Voil� -- the public option is gone.

The coy routine was working so well for Snowe that, as she walked into the Hart Building on Tuesday morning for the committee vote on the legislation, she claimed she still hadn't made a decision.

Finally, three hours later, the wavering lawmaker was ready to announce her position. Sort of. "Is this bill all that I would want? Is it all that it can be? No," said Snowe. "But when history calls, history calls." After this halfhearted announcement that she was, with "reservations," becoming the only Republican to vote with the Democrats, she added a warning: "My vote today is my vote today. It doesn't forecast what my vote will be tomorrow."

Give that woman a Lombardi Trophy.

Read the complete article at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/13/AR2009101301771.html?hpid=topnews

--------------------------------------------

Harry Reid, unhealthy for America
The Senate majority leader's position on healthcare reform is based on what is best for him, not the rest of the country
By Hugh Jackson
October 12, 2009

If you would like to be satisfied with Senate majority leader Harry Reid's position on healthcare reform, please select from the following menu:

28 August: "I am in favour of the public option. ... There's a lot of people who misunderstand this. They think it's some government programme. But there are many ways we can do it. One would be to have an entity like Medicare. I really don't favour that. I think what we should have is a private entity that ... has direction from the federal government, so that people who don't fall within the parameters of being able to get insurance from their employer, they would have a place to go."

10 September: "If we can come up with a concept of a co-operative that does just that, that is, it makes more competition and makes insurance companies honest, yes, I think that would fit the bill."

24 September: A "trigger" by which there would only be a public option if insurance companies fail to meet unspecified conditions is "a pretty doggone good idea".

1 October: "Remember, a public option is a relative term. ... There's a public option, there's a public option and there's a public option. And we're going to look at each of them."

To recap: Reid supports whatever can get 60 votes. He also supports the public option, so long as it's private, a co-op, a trigger and finally, an ethereal concept.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/oct/12/harry-reid-healthcare-senate