Pelosi's Not So Robust Public Option: A Victory for the Insurance Companies

[debbierlus]

The public option was always a compromise for serious supporters of health-care reform, who -- like Barack Obama when he was running for the Senate in 2003 -- knew that a single-payer "Medicare for All" system was what America needed to provide health care to everyone while controlling costs.

But, in the reform legislation debuted Thursday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the compromise was even more compromised than had been expected.

Pelosi says the legislation is "historic," and celebrates the fact that is does still include a public option -- a component many pundits had said was destined for abandonment.

But, while there is a public option, it is anything but robust.

Progressives believe Pelosi has bent to far to the right.

And The New York Times suggests as much in its analysis, which declares that:


Under pressure from moderate-to-conservative members of the House Democratic caucus, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided to propose a government-run insurance plan that would negotiate rates with doctors and hospitals, rather than using prices set by the government...

Ms. Pelosi said the public plan, which she prefers to call a "consumer option," would compete with private insurers. But the speaker was apparently unable to muster the votes needed for the 'robust' liberal version of a public plan, which she has repeatedly said would save more money for consumers and the government.


Translation: The "public option" Pelosi and her team have proposed a plan that would not make payments for care based on Medicare rates, as the Congressional Progressive Caucus and key Senate Democrats have proposed.

Rather, under the Pelosi plan, the rates be tied to those of the big insurance companies. That's a big, big victory for the insurance industry, as it will undermine the ability of the public option to compete -- and to create pressure for reduced costs.

Pelosi's plan also drops a number of provisions that had been advanced at the committee level to promote consideration of "Medicare for All" models and to allow states to experiment with single-payer plans.

That's an especially bitter pill for House progressives, who has won support for state-based experimentation in committee votes.

Groups such as Progressive Democrats of America were quick to raised alarm bells because some of the most innovative responses to the health-care crisis are being forged at the state level. While single-payer proposals are being blocked at the federal level, PDA national director Tim Carpenter says the single-payer fight is ramping up in the states

MORE AT THIS LINK (read the whole thing, worth the time)....http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/489881/pelosi_s_not_so_robust_public_option

Where the hell do we go from here?

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Where do we go from here? The morgue, because that

seems to be where most of our Sens and Reps want us to end up.

[debbierlus]

2. No, we need to speak up and show up

If not now, when?

[pecwae]

6. Proceed directly there.

Do not pass Go and do not collect $200.

[GreenPartyVoter]

26. More like "Pay us $200 for letting you go to the morgue."

[derby378]

3. Oh, this keeps getting better and better

:mad:

[berni_mccoy]

4. You're only posting this because the House Bill is not Single Payer.

[robinlynne]

10. bullshit. read the Kucincich ammendment and its history.

[rudy23]

12. Is that the new talking point? I've only seen it two dozen times w/ the exact same wording today.

What are you going to tell me next, that I'm "whiny", a "Naderite" or an Alex Jones fan?

[debbierlus]

20. Don't start with me. I am in no mood.

[tridim]

23. When are you ever "in the mood"?

You're always a pessimist no matter what happens, good or bad.

[debbierlus]

27. Instead of making meaningless snide remarks about me

You might want to actually educate yourself on the issues and policies of this Congress and President.

Facing reality is the most basic and fundamental step in advocating true change. And, if you consider my reality based posts too 'negative' to handle, go over to the lounge and talk about halloween candy.

[berni_mccoy]

31. The ONLY time you would be in the mood is if Kucinich was President and we had HR676 as law.

[90-percent]

5. Kucinich on Ed yesterday

"If this is the best we can do, then it’s time to ask ourselves, whether the two-party system is truly capable of representing the American people or whether the system has been so compromised by special interests that we can’t even protect the health of our own people."

It's the end of democracy as we know it and I feel fine.

-90% Jimmy

[chimpymustgo]

11. That's the best line of this entire debate.

[d_b]

21. I'm going to wait for Obama to sign the piece of shit before I bail

"Other" for party, I guess.

[rhett o rick]

7. Rec 5. Even if the HOR bill was robust it would never survive the Senate intact.

I am very disappointed but ready to be even more disappointed after the Senate butchers it.

[polichick]

8. Big Ed just suggesting waiting until after the midterm election...

We could run real Dems against incumbents and then pass REAL reform.

[KansDem]

9. So, Pelosi protected the insurance companies?

Rather, under the Pelosi plan, the rates be tied to those of the big insurance companies. That's a big, big victory for the insurance industry, as it will undermine the ability of the public option to compete -- and to create pressure for reduced costs.

So the 7- and 8-digit salary CEOs will get to set the price? :eyes:

[FREEDOM61]

28. The Democratic sold their soul to the

:evilgrin: You know i have been watching this for a while now. And i got to say this, People i hope that you see now who runs congress and the white house these Big Ins. Companies. The middle class and the poor people don't have a chance we lost today. where are the leaders that are standing for use? Where? maybe he or she is not born jet. We need a strong public option today, not 2013.Democrat will pay for this, they are more worry about keeping their seats then trying to help the people that got them in

[debbierlus]

29. The knew they needed to include the TERM public option -

But, since they never, ever clearly defined what it meant, they can craft it to the liking of their corporate masters.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. I'm thinking progressives are going to have to stop this.

If this passes, it will mean the insurance companies will control everything for years and years to come.

[debbierlus]

22. Billions and billions more in profit - more money, more power...

The private insurance companies are leeches.

The need to be excised from the American system entirely.

[John Q. Citizen]

24. We need to start a Democrats opposed to the insurance company bailout group, not here

but on the local and national level.

this is like when the Repos were bashing Clinton, and Clinton was pushing NAFTA through.

The corporatists screwed the American people and we were left fighting amongst ourselves.

[Autumn]

25. Well it was changed to

insurance finance reform, so it isn't to surprising that we will be financing the insurance companies.

[glinda]

14. Divide and conquer. Make so many options that it can't work.

[Nikki Stone1]

15. I hate to say I told you so....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6860124

[seafan]

16. This bill also protects Pharma patents on biologic drugs (no generics allowed)

This is a true outrage.

[debbierlus]

18. I know Seafan, I saw your journal post on the home page & K & R it

I was seething while I read it.

I am so fucking sick of the corporate politicians.

[Political Heretic]

17. this "public option" collaborates with private insurance rather than competes with it.

It fails.

There are still some good things, like making denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions illegal. But this isn't comprehensive health reform. It's insurance reform.

There is no "public option" that would compete with private insurance, but only a government run insurance that must negotiate its rates with private insurance and pharmaceutical companies. This is what the insurance companies wanted.

Now when we pass this, the momentum for further "health reform" will be dead for another generation and we'll still be stuck with a health system than is the worst of any industrialized nation in the world in terms of coverage and cost.

[debbierlus]

19. Dean has always said that if you want to do insurance reform, don't subsidize them

You could pass a law tomorrow making it illegal to deny coverage based on preexisting conditions, you don't have to create a subsidized tax payer customer base to do it.

The whole of health care reform has been nothing but a song and dance to mandate the corrupt, expensive, and unethical corporate system. We should be DESTROYING it, instead we expand it.

It is grotesque.

[chimpymustgo]

30. Have we heard from Dr. Dean today?

[debbierlus]

32. He's good with it