Obama will sign a bill that includes a public option. Q: Has the Senate given up on a public option

[ProSense]

Schumer hasn't:

Sam Stein

Schumer: Senate Dems Will "Come Together On A Public Option"

Senator Chuck Schumer said on Sunday that Democrats in the Senate would agree on a public option for insurance coverage, though the proposal will be different from the ones currently under consideration.

"We are going to come together on a public option," said the New York Democrat. "It will have some modifications. Senators like Tom Carper , one of the leaders of the moderate group, have made some proposals. Others have made some proposals. There are lots of different alternatives. But we need a public option simply for this reason: There is no competition in the insurance industry right now... the public option will bring costs down by providing competition. And it is only an option."

Appearing on ABC's "This Week," Schumer's remarks come at a time when the public option seems more than likely to be jettisoned from the final health care bill. His comments should be a bit soothing for a progressive community that increasingly equates the success of reform with the ability to pass a government-run plan.

That said, a whole slew of sub-debates could very well erupt in the next few weeks over the types of adjustments that Schumer and others are willing to make on the public plan. Carper's proposal to allow state governments to set up and administer a health insurance entity, for instance, may make political sense -- it could have the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate. But it is also a proposal that drew heavy criticism from progressives when it was first put forward by former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle in mid-June.

Senator Sanders hasn't. In fact, there are at least 52 Senators who haven't.

On the verge of making history:

For decades, health reformers have tried to set up a universal healthcare system in America.

But if the finance committee votes to approve it on Monday, it will be the first time that a healthcare reform bill has been passed by all five of the congressional committees with jurisdiction over healthcare.

link

[jenmito]

1. All the clueless talking heads said this morning that the final bill won't have a public

option. The same talking heads said Obama would not go to Copenhagen unless the Olympics were "wired" for him to win the bid.

[ProSense]

2. Obama can't win, but he doesn't have to.

All these assholes in the media are pushing the meme that Obama is a failure far more than they did for Bush. It's ludicrous.

Here's the thing: They can ask all the gotcha questions and write all the BS editorials they want to, the fact is that President Obama is moving his agenda and they are powerless to stop him. They can only spend time trying to confuse the public and distort the the record. It's simply important that people call them on their bullshit.

The political process is a lot slower than it takes to conjure up a gotcha moment or pen an editorial filled with hyperbole, but in the end Obama's record will speak for itself.

[jenmito]

3. Exactly...

and most of them were comparing his "up-coming failure" to get a bill with a public option to his failure to get the Olympics bid. :eyes:

[Clio the Leo]

4. Here is a serious question to those who feel the Pres. isn't doing enough....

(obviously this is not directed at you ProSense, I'm just piggy backing off of your OP lol)

four of the five Congressional committees have written a bill that includes a PO

of the fifth committee that will not, the Sens who proposed a PO amendment feel confident the final bill with have one (Sens Schumer and Rockefeller)
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/schumer-and-rockefeller-we-will-get-public-option.php

Sen. Harkin of the HELP committee believes the final bill will have one.
http://iowaindependent.com/20394/harkin-public-option-can-pass-senate-by-comfortable-margin

Even stinky old Republican sometimey Judd Gregg thinks the final bill will have a PO....
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Gregg+says+public+option+will+make+the+final+cut&articleId=de26b9a8-2702-46b6-9cf0-36dd80da6ab6
.... and obviously, he doesn't want it in there.

And please understand, I am NOT trying to pick a fight, I am LEGITIMATELY trying to understand what's going on in the heads of those who fear there will be no PO. You have a legitimate right to be worried .... but where is this fear coming from?

Or is it that you think the PO wont be adequate?

Or?............

[quantass]

6. My fear is a useless "trigger" for that PO

Ideally i want a strong PO but that is unlikely so just having A PO to me is a good one. My big fear is a "trigger" which never gets pulled..just like Part-D. And of course, lets not forget mandates for everyone to get private insurance in the mean time. It would be a disaster! Possibly groundwork for a revolution....finally!

Thankfully 4/5 bills have POs which is great...but is it just window dressing or a real cornerstone?

Just having people like Grayson and Weiner and Sanders around makes me feel the democratic party aren't all jellyfish.

[quantass]

5. Politically the likely end result will be a Medicare-Part-D like "Triggered" Public Option

since although it is a terrible solution it seems to balance getting spineless democrats on board and possibly a few republicans who are warming to the idea of a trigger which everyone knows will never be triggered no matter how high costs get. I will seriously be blown away by the political system of Washington if they can pass a bill that includes ANY kind of Public Option that does NOT include a trigger...I do have new respect for the few strong democrats who have at least made the PO phrase part of the discussion because without them it would have died much sooner. God i wish the WH was more supportive of a strong PO.

[jeanpalmer]

7. The public option is a distraction

of very little consequence. It lowers the cost of insurance slightly while not doing anything to curtail the overall cost of healthcare. It certainly is not a frontal assault on the huge inefficiencies and exorbitant costs of healthcare in the US. And if Congress adopts a stripped down version, as looks likely, it will amount to nothing.

[unblock]

8. it will amount to nothing FOR NOW.

i agree that the effectiveness of any politically feasible (for money-beholden congresscritters, not for voters) public option will be underwhelming.

for now.

eventually, as health care and health insurance costs continue to rise, the public will howl in pain and scream for more help, and we'll have a mechanism in place to do just that. it will become quite a lot easier to get real reform at that point.

am i happy with that? no, but it's not all bad news.

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. My question is how hard will Obama fight for a robust public option?

Not a fig leaf covering private insurance welfare, but a real one? I do not assume that Obama is not working hard behind the scenes to make it happen, he may well be. But unless at some point he really attempts to use his bully pulpit to rally support for a public option, if it is in trouble (again I do not jump to the conclusion that it is in trouble), then he is only "willing to sign that bill" not really fighting to get that bill.

In general I support Obama and I think overall he has played this well so far, but as in Basketball, it is often how the final two minutes are played that really counts the most.