U.S. Lawmakers May Be Moving Toward Consensus on Public Option

[TomCADem]

Source: Bloomberg

Oct. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Senate Democrats are leaning toward including a government-run insurance plan in a health-care measure that would let individual states opt out, a proposal House leaders signaled would be acceptable.

The establishment of the so-called public option to compete with private insurers is opposed by Republicans and has split Democrats. To get support from reluctant members of his party, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is likely to include the opt-out version in the legislation, said a Democratic aide who requested anonymity.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who backs what she calls a more “robust” form of the public option, was asked yesterday about the Senate proposal at a Washington press conference. “I don’t think there’s much problem with that,” she said.

“At the end of the day, we will have a public option in our legislation,” Pelosi, a California Democrat, said. “It’s good, better, best. We’re having that debate.”


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/afs_qwysnviw

[MichiganVote]

1. Consensus? For themselves maybe...not for the public at large.

[TomCADem]

2. But, I Find It Hard To Believe Fox News' Poll That Majority Oppose PO and Government Run Healthcare

Media Matter has a good discussion of why RW attacks on the most recent polling data are wrong, and Nate Silver had a great discussion of why Fox's polling is skewed.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200910210035

[chisymbolrho]

7. Rejoinder

Right on. I believe that to be true.

[lonestarnot]

3. What bullshit stupid do they take us to be?

[TomCADem]

4. Fact Check Has A Nice Report Debunking AHIP's Report

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-pricewaterhousecoopers-premium-problem/

###

It makes for a pretty easy day of fact-checking when the very authors of a less-than-thorough analysis of a bill come out and say, you know, that study wasn’t exactly thorough.

And we didn’t pay them to say that.

America’s Health Insurance Plans, the main insurance industry lobby, however, did pay PricewaterhouseCoopers to take a look at certain aspects of the Senate Finance Committee health care bill – certain aspects AHIP doesn’t really like. PwC concluded that the bill would increase health care premiums substantially more than they would rise otherwise. AHIP released the study in what’s widely interpreted as an attack on the legislation, but now PwC cautions that its analysis should be taken with a grain of salt.

The PwC report estimated that the average family premium would cost $25,900 in 2019 if certain provisions of the bill were implemented, $4,000 more than the average premium cost under current law. The report projects the most significant increase to hit the individual market (as opposed to small-group and large-group markets), with premiums increasing 47 percent more than they otherwise would by 2016. PwC acknowledged in its report that it didn’t factor in various provisions, such as premium subsidies, that would lower its estimates. And the company released a statement last night to point that out yet again:

###

[lonestarnot]

5. Thank you.

[Alcibiades]

6. If the price of a public option is

providing an opportunity for red state legislatures to shoot themselves in the foot by denying their constituents health care, then I'm all for it.

[saracat]

8. I take it you live in a blue state? So red state dems can just drop dead?

Or perhaps"move"?And who gives a rats ass if they have no money to move or no job to go to? And forget about the fact that many don't have the "time" to wait for this to be fixed. I guess its no big deal. They would have died eventually anyway, and those that lose their homes, well, odds are good they would have lost them anyway.:mad:

[dkf]

10. More incentive to vote Democrat!

Yay.

[saracat]

11. Really? Not if you are dead. It makes me want my money back.

My state party, one of the weathiest in the nation at that time, 2008, only sent it to the Blue States anyway! This will inspire many Dems in the red states NOT to vote at all as it will seem hopeless. Others will vote against the Dems because they will feel betrayed. But I don't suppose some can even imagine the anger that this will release among some Dems when they realize they have given their last nickel to the party and are thrown under the bus.The anger won't be at the GOP because they always are expected to betray the people.The anger will be at the Democrats who promised to have our backs.

[earcandle]

12. Livid? Take a deep breath. Its going to be good for all of us once we get a public option. The

Feds must pay what the states refuse funding for right?
 so calm down. 

[saracat]

13. Doesn't sound like that is the idea at all.

[Alcibiades]

14. I live in NC

A blue state that turned red but has now turned blue again. And, no, it won't come to that: the states whose representatives have whined the loudest about how bad the public option is would opt in in a matter of a few months, once it became evident that the public option works well. Securing a real public option, and Democratic majorities to support it nationally, is a big deal.

We hit our catastrophic insurance level in January of this year, and we'll hit it again next January. I'm well aware of the cost families pay for our lousy health care system, but I think that a public option would be more secure under this scheme.

[dkf]

9. This will be a boon to Democratic Governors

Its pretty damned smart.