It's Official: Senate Bill to Have Public Option with "Opt Out"

After 2014, everybody's in? (0.00 / 0)

If so, I can live with that.

---

by: JimC @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 14:49:37 PM CDT

thanks for getting this online (4.00 / 2)

My worry (which I hope is unfounded)

By  allowing the opt out at the state level are we just encouraging powerful forces to move downstream and influence (perhaps more influenceable?) folks to opt out?

Hard to imagine a small state legislature standing up to the full force of a powerful consortium of Big Insurance, Big Pharma, Etc.

Am I wrong?

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 14:56:02 PM CDT

oh, for cryin out loud (0.00 / 0)

if they're giving up on GOP support - why not craft a GOOD bill. This is NOT a good bill. In states where insurance companies have a great deal of power and influence (like NH) - the opt out is almost a guarantee. This is ridiculous.

Bipartisanship is a childish dream in this political climate. Time to butch up and take BOLD action.  

---

by: susanthe @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 15:11:38 PM CDT

Right On Susan! (0.00 / 0)

What are the results for kissing up to the Republicans?
Zip, nothing, nada.
Stand up and fight for what's right!
At least you start somewhere.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 15:37:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not convinced of that - (4.00 / 4)

because it's opt out, not opt in. Both chambers need to pass the bill and the governor has to sign it. This time the inertia is on our side.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 16:43:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I hope you're right, elwood (0.00 / 0)

but whatever happens - will be what we're stuck with for decades. Whatever is passed will be the excuse, possibly for a generation, of why we aren't doing better.

"We did health care reform in 2009."

Even if it sucks, and you all know I think this sucks. I can't understand fighting so hard for something that isn't good, just because "we can't have single payer right now."

On an unpleasant note of reality - this won't take effect for 4 years, BUT the costs will. People who have insurance will see their rates getting jacked. This is going to be a PR nightmare.  

---

by: susanthe @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 19:14:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes. (0.00 / 0)

this won't take effect for 4 years, BUT the costs will. People who have insurance will see their rates getting jacked. This is going to be a PR nightmare.

Please tell me, someone, that this is somehow being addressed.

What "bridges" are being put in place via the bill until the full law takes effect?

---

by: Dean Barker @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 19:32:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I believe there is a $5 Billion fund being set up to provide insurance immediately to those who cant currently get policies. (4.00 / 3)

This is only one of several proposals to phase in the beneficial portions of the program sooner than 4 years. One of the things that will have to worked out is how much they can front load the good parts and remain budget neutral. (The CBO analysis will probably provide the parameters).

I think there is a general understanding among the Democratic caucus that it is important to actually deliver real benefits ASAP, but as usual, there will be powerful forces fighting to delay and defeat.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 22:40:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Josh Marshall makes a pretty good argumen] that this is a reasonable and important step forward both in policy and politics: (4.00 / 2)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c...

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 17:46:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A good piece (0.00 / 0)

Though I'm not sure how this plan puts the onus on Republicans. They just have to say no to a different thing.

---

by: JimC @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 21:10:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A Good Opening Gambit (4.00 / 1)

because this will force people like Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu to go on the record for or against cloture. Its one thing to vote against your party's major legislation, it is an entirely different matter to vote against them on a procedural vote.

Would a NH legislature controlled by Democrats opt out? I can hardly believe that but I am a new resident so maybe I don't understand all the local issues. Medicaid is an opt out program and not one state has opted out. I just don't see that happening.

"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." -- Molly Ivins  

---

by: The Grand Panjandrum @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 15:36:26 PM CDT

Public "option" states can "opt" out of (0.00 / 0)

I don't get it.

---

by: JimC @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 15:56:07 PM CDT

Do the math (4.00 / 3)

If state opt-out allows a real public option that isn't too watered down otherwise, and they can get 60 for cloture and 50+VP for passage, go for it.

I'm all for giving up on Republican support, but that means keeping the Democratic caucus together.  I'm for whatever is the best bill logistically possible--if this gets the job done, great.

We can complain about the handful of states that might actually opt out, but for now, we need Nelson and Landrieu and Lieberman and Baucus and Conrad to vote for cloture, which they should anyway, but "should" doesn't get us anywhere.

Anybody know whether opt-out states can change their mind and opt back in after 2014?

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 16:11:33 PM CDT

Adding: who needs Snowe? (4.00 / 2)

Let it be remembered, when the fruits of this effort are realized and the history of healthcare reform written, that not one Republican stood with Barack Obama to do it.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 16:59:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The "trigger" was a joke. (4.00 / 1)

So I see this as the least terrible of the senate possibilities.

Yet it is still a stoopid idea, and it gives the Republicans in NH something to run on, and lobbyists something to crush reps with.  

"Vote for me, and I'll file a bill to opt the Pledge state out of Comrade Obama's Free Welfare Health Care for the Indolent!" or somesuch.

Still Cillizza and the rest of the Villagers who declared the Public Option dead all have egg on their faces now, so there's that.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 16:54:48 PM CDT

Let them run on it if they choose (4.00 / 1)

They always could have run on "Vote for me and I'll opt out of Medicaid" (or medicare if that had an opt out also). They never have because it would kill them-- it is one thing to run against an unknown. It is another to run on taking away already granted health care. Just dont see how that would work out for them.

If we have a race that is framed as the party that supported another option for citizens, did away with prexisting conditions and made everyone insurable and versus a party that wants to take it away, that doesnt seem  all that bad to me.

Agree 100% that this is good place (aka least terrible) to be coming out of the Senate.

If we went back 3-4 weeks , how  many of us would have been confident that we wouldnt be coming  out of the Senate with a trigger, or coops , or nothing?

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 17:38:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Baucus. (0.00 / 0)

Makes one want to bash one's head into a wall:

   "It is time to make our system work better for patients and providers, for small business owners and for our economy. It is time for health care reform. For more than a year, we've been working to meet the goals of reducing the growth of health care costs, improving quality and efficiency and expanding coverage. There are a tremendous number of complicated issues that go into reform and the public option is certainly one of them. I included a public option in the health reform blueprint I released nearly one year ago, and continue to support any provision, including a public option, that will ensure choice and competition and get the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate. Success should be our threshold and I am going to fight hard for the 60 votes we need to meet that goal this year."

Why did you waste our time, Max?  Why did you give the GOP August?

At least we know from this he is a cloture vote.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Mon Oct 26, 2009 at 18:23:21 PM CDT