Reply #35: New Doctors for America (another DFA?) group supports what Baucus wants. [View All]

[madfloridian]

Apparently they will go along with whatever Max Baucus comes out with. There are several paragraphs in this article that make me wonder about the purpose of the this group which has named itself DFA...Doctors for America.

That makes me uncomfortable.

Could be entirely coincidental they are going along with Baucus's "sort of maybe not we don't need public option" attitude while giving itself the same initials as one of the groups coming out strongly for public option...DFA meaning Dean's Democracy for America. I am sure it is just a coincidence.

This article from CBS indicates they will back Max Baucus.

Doctors' Group Backs Baucus' Health Care Strategy

Here are several of the paragraphs that bother me.

As Congress and the Obama administration attempt to push health care legislation to the president's desk by this fall, the Senate this week begins a fresh round of debates over proposals to include in the bill the option of a government-managed health care plan.

"This is probably one of the two or three 800 pound gorillas" in the room, Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, told reporters Monday.

Yes, the gorilla that scares the insurance industry.

Baucus is not the only one interested in keeping options open. The senator joined the Center for American Progress on Monday to announce the re-formation of Doctors for America, a grassroots organization of over 11,000 doctors in support of health care reform. Formerly known as Doctors for Obama, the group during the 2008 campaign advocated Barack Obama's proposal for a government-managed option. On Monday, however, Doctors for America President and Co-Founder Vivek Murthy said the group supported Baucus' flexible approach.

"We do think a public plan is worth considering," Murthy said. "A key priority for us is whatever is put forth does improve access (to health care)... Nothing is off the table."

Baucus said his committee will probably review two or three alternatives, such as the health care "exchange" system in Massachusetts, which requires consumers to purchase a private plan that meets government-established minimum standards.

That sounds a little like wavering to me, but they don't come out and say no. Just that all that flexibility sounds good.

Two people for sure are against the government run option.

Specter has said definitively that he does not support including a government-managed plan in health care legislation. Senator Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) has also said he is not in favor of the plan.