General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCentrist Dems wary of public option push
?itok=6jfp2cKdMore at link: The Hill
Centrist Democrats appear reluctant to join their partys embrace of a public option for ObamaCare.
The idea of adding a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers is making a comeback in the Democratic Party, with President Obama endorsing the idea Monday, two days after Hillary Clinton emphasized a public option as part of an effort to win over Bernie Sanders and his supporters.
But among more centrist members of the Senate, where the public option was stopped in 2009, there is little enthusiasm for the idea.
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D), who represents conservative-leaning North Dakota, pushed back the hardest.
I think it's critically important that we stop trying to complicate healthcare and we start taking a look at what needs to be fixed in ObamaCare, Heitkamp said. Until we actually have those conversations and we have bipartisan support, I think it's unrealistic to assume that we're going to see any kind of expansion of care.
Heitkamp proposed tweaks to the health law, along with other centrist Democrats, in 2014, such as streamlining reporting requirements to lighten the load on businesses.
While a public option has no chance of passing so long as Republicans control the House and Senate, its far from certain that the idea could pass a Democratic Congress, given the skepticism or outright opposition among centrists like Heitkamp.
Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), another Democrat from a red-leaning state, referred questions to his press office when asked if he supported a public option. His press office did not respond to inquiries.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), who survived a reelection scare in 2014, was noncommittal on the question of a public option, pivoting to a different change hed like to see in ObamaCare.
He called for addressing the requirement in ObamaCare for providing coverage to people who work more than 30 hours per week. Critics of the law say that requirement has created an incentive for employers be push people into part-time positions.
As we talk about other options we also have to address things like [the] 29 to 30 hour cliff, Warner said.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)This baby step will be a hard fight to win.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Democrats and boot their asses back to the GOP. Those are the same Democrats that vote regularly with the GOP anyway...especially Heidi.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)bluedye33139
(1,474 posts)Home Depot, among other companies, keeps the bulk of its staff at 28 hours per week in order to avoid being required to provide health insurance. The 29-hour cliff is one of the biggest anti-ACA talking points, and it resonates with working people very much.
And I'd be very interested in seeing solutions to this.
KPN
(15,646 posts)bluedye33139
(1,474 posts)I support the public option, but that does not address the requirement that companies provide insurance at 30 hours and above. That would be a different fix, no?
I think the better solution would be to have a health authority like Canada or the UK, with universal coverage and (unfortunately) rigorous cost control.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)It's the pinnacle of idiocy that we're still arguing in support of a for-profit healthcare system when it's painfully obvious that it's helping NO one but the upper-middle-classers and above.
And GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE with this horseshit argument that we don't have the money for this. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT. If bombing countries and corporate pork are replacing due human rights on our spending priority list, then we're in deep shit.
But hey, keep buying the same old "Cold War" Red-bait CRAP, Dumberica, as you willingly drown in medical bankruptcies for the crime of getting sick.
I'll bet there's going to be SOME nation out there who'll wise up and switch from their "CommieCare" to our "Best Helth Care In Thuh WORLD!" any day now; I can just FEEL it!
theaocp
(4,241 posts)Republican support before expanding care? So, why not just say you're not for expanding care? It's more honest.
bluedye33139
(1,474 posts)You accuse her of dishonesty because you believe that she is secretly opposed to single-payer? Do you have any evidence for your accusation?
theaocp
(4,241 posts)for this liberal idea. If she's not dishonest about the approach, she's a blithering moron. Take your pick.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)but I don't think it will be at a significantly lower cost than what's available now, either in terms of premiums or co-pays/deductibles.