A “Public Option Compromise” That’s Not?

If the weekend is any guide, the Senate health reform bill is not likely to undergo much tweaking. Between Friday and Sunday, despite hours of debate on the Senate floor, the only amendments that passed were those from Democrats simply reiterating things the bill already calls for. One sponsored by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse was a “sense of the Senate” amendment to reiterate that funds collected by a new long-term care insurance program would be used only for that program. It passed 98-0. Sen. Debbie Stabenow’s amendment reiterating that Medicare Advantage plans will continue to include standard Medicare benefits as defined by law passed 97-1. And an amendment from Sen. John Kerry that passed 96-0 reiterated the Democratic position that home health benefits will not be cut by the Senate bill.

Amendments that would have altered the bill were all voted down, including proposals to scrap huge sections entirely and provisions to limit the tax deduction for insurance company executive employees and cap plaintiffs’ lawyers’ fees in malpractice cases. Nope, the real health reform action over the weekend was elsewhere – off the Senate floor and far away from the C-SPAN cameras catching the all-too-familiar debate points.

As Jay Newton-Small reported, President Obama trekked up to Capitol Hill on Sunday to rally the Democratic caucus behind closed doors and offer up a “dose of inspiration.” And elsewhere, a group of Democratic senators was reportedly hammering out yet another “public option compromise,” albeit one appears – at least from my reading – unlikely to satisfy any true public option diehards.

According to Politico, the new proposal would create an exchange of non-profit private insurance plans within a to-be-created national exchange. There would be no government-run plan at all. (The Senate bill currently calls for a national government-run plan that states can opt out of.) The non-profit exchange would be modeled on the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan, which is where federal employees – including members of Congress – currently can choose from among an array of private health plans. (An exchange is basically an electronic marketplace where insurance plans can be reviewed, compared and sold. Under the Senate bill, a new state-by-state exchanges would be established and would be limited to individuals and small businesses – at least initially.) Details are still scant, but it’s unclear how this new exchange within an exchange would be a “public option,” other than the fact that it would reportedly be administered by the federal Office of Personnel Management. Public options supporters are certainly skeptical. Writes Jacob Hacker, a Yale political science professor, health policy expert and public option champion, over at The New Republic:

…Another, even stranger idea is to offer the nonprofit plans available in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP) within the exchange. Since the FEHBP is itself a form of exchange, this amounts to offering a new set of private plans within a new set of private plans. How is that going to provide real pressure on private insurers in a consolidated insurance market in which nonprofit plans already have a large presence (and often act little differently from for-profit plans)?

A poster at Daily Kos agrees:

It’s not a public option. It’s essentially an exchange within the exchange. Now maybe it’s a good substitution for the exchanges–just open up the FEHBP to people instead of creating, in the House’s case a national exchange, or in the Senate version multiple exchanges….But it’s still not a public option, like most of the “compromises” we’ve seen floated in the Senate.

The goal of all of these so-called “compromises,” of course, is to come up with a plan that moderate Democrats who oppose a real public option can get behind, without alienating Democrats for whom the public option is a deal breaker.

Senators are back on Monday and moderate Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson is reportedly planning to offer his “Stupak-like” amendment related to abortion coverage.

Related Topics: amendments, John Kerry, public option, senate health care bill, sheldon whitehouse, stabenow, Budgets, Congress, Democratic Party, Harry Reid, Health Care, Republican Party, Senate
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • carotexas1

    Thank you Kate, I had the same thoughts as you when I looked at what amendments were passing. They are just wasting time.

    I have decided not to worry about the Public Option, if they do not want a safety net for us, and do not want to do what they need to do control costs there is nothing I can do. The only things I can do is by my vote and with hold donations.

    Like the President said watching congress is enough to give you a headache.

  • destor23

    Why not just open the FEHBP exchange to every single American and be done with it?

  • Art Pepper

    The goal of all of these so-called “compromises,” of course, is to come up with a plan that moderate centrist Democrats who oppose a real public option real reform can get behind, without alienating Democrats for whom the public option is a deal breaker while telling the progressive wing to suck it up.

  • ilikechips

    KATE, HOW ABOUT BREAKING FROM YOUR FELLOW LIBERAL TIME JOURNO’S AND DO A STORY ON CLIMATEGATE, TIME CAN’T BOYCOTT THE STORY FOR EVER. OH YEA, SURE YOU CAN..JUST LIKE ACORN.,,RIGHT!!

  • palininatowel

    Why do teabaggers always type in ALL CAPS?

  • the committee

    A government-administered non-profit insurance program? Who knew such things existed?
    .
    Still: why not take the public option and call it that? Freakin senators are too cute by half.

  • michaelfury
  • destor23

    @palinatowel: Because… LIPTON!

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    To be heard over the voices in their head…….

  • Cliff

    Me, I like how his ellipses go from periods to commas mid-stream, like he was just so angry that he couldn’t force his fingers to hit the right keys.

  • pafro

    Classic.

  • palininatowel

    Paul,
    .
    That’s a keeper.

  • pafro

    If I was a liberal Senator, I would offer two amendments:
    1. A sense of the Senate amendment that the federal government has no right to have its own insurance program, any such insurance is Socialism, and therefore should get out of the crop insurance and flood insurance businesses.
    2. A proposal to fold crop insurance and flood insurance into single program whose manager would be tasked with running any public option for health care.
    I think it would be nice to see how the Republicans and Lieberdems feel about the other federally run insurance programs.

  • freeinpa

    “Why do teabaggers always type in ALL CAPS?”

    So douche-baggers can read it

  • palininatowel

    SO I TAKE IT THIS IS EASIER FOR YOU TO READ, FREEINPA.

  • http://politicalwrestling.wordpress.com/2009/12/06/126-pcw-extreme-political-tv-finale-bcs-wtf-axis-of-evil-vs-american-citizen/ 12/6-PCW Extreme Political TV- Finale: BCS = WTF? Axis of Evil vs. American Citizen « Political Championship Wrestling

    [...] With Real Sweat Op-Ed “Democrats See Opportunity in Obstacles” by Gov. Jack Markell  Cracks A “Public Option Compromise” That’s Not?  Obama Makes No Mention Of Public Option In Get Er Done Speech To Senate Democrats Today  Boston [...]

  • Ivy_B

    I second your amendment, pafro.

  • brmull

    FEHBP can’t control costs either. Premiums are going up 8.8% next year which is the same as the industry average. This belies the notion that any kind of exchange will work. We need a government-run insurance alternative to provide competitition for private insurance and negotiate forcefully with providers. Nothing else will work.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/10/a_difficult_graph_for_health-c.html

  • freeinpa

    What a rapier like wit—for a third grader

    All caps. Did you switch sides??

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I’d take a private, single-payer system, over a public option .

  • pierogielunaire

    What do we want”
    Reconciliation!
    When do we want it?
    Now!
    -
    OK, so it doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue, but there you have it.

  • rustyreturns

    “We need a government-run insurance alternative to provide competitition for private insurance and negotiate forcefully with providers.”

    .
    I have as yet to see anyone provide any facts what-so-ever as to how this would even control costs? Even the CBO lays claim to rising health care costs, and nothing or no one is going to change it unless we put into place regulations that control actual health care costs. How much we pay doctors. How much we pay for an MRI. How much we pay for medicine. Period.
    .
    The other cost control measure which will stop the rising health insurance premiums: Let’s spell it people….together now……….R-A-T-I-O-N-I-N-G
    .
    Unless regulations are passed to stop the use of un-necessary treatments, tests, and the like. Then and only then will you see health care costs go down instead of going up. But, we know Democrats will never take this extreme step. Doing so spells their complete demise. It is the same as cutting spending overall. No way in hell will Democrats ever pass legislation limiting Government spending especially for domestic programs. It just will not happen.
    .

  • allthingsinaname

    They can pass whatever kind of bill they want. When it proves to be ineffective, then it will be changed.
    .
    Part of the problem is what are they trying to accomplish and what is it that the public wants. Clearly there needs to be a plan to insure the uninsured. When costs rise enough that both the uninsured and the insured can not afford it then things will change, not before.
    .
    So pass a bill, if it fails, it fails. Without a bill, the issues dies, with a bill it stays alive.

  • Matt

    Will liberal Dems be OK with completely cutting the public option out of reform? Because that’s what this is; not a “compromise.”

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • 53_3

    I wonder if it has to do with forcing reality to pay more attention to them?

  • 53_3

    “The other cost control measure which will stop the rising health insurance premiums: Let’s spell it people….together now……….R-A-T-I-O-N-I-N-G”
    .
    We already have that when HCICs drop, deny, and / or refuse to cover certain treatments and / or people. These incidences get big play in the news, such as the overweight baby. Pre-existing conditions?
    .
    “Unless regulations are passed to stop the use of un-necessary treatments, tests, and the like. Then and only then will you see health care costs go down instead of going up.”
    .
    It would be great, but who decides just what is necessary or not. Right now, actuaries, bean counters, and CEOs of HCICs engage in the practice of denying coverage based on the bottom line, not on medical parameters.
    .
    “But, we know Democrats will never take this extreme step. Doing so spells their complete demise. It is the same as cutting spending overall. No way in hell will Democrats ever pass legislation limiting Government spending especially for domestic programs. It just will not happen.”
    .
    This is just empty rhetoric. Make some real points, Rusty.
    .
    By the way, how many companies in single payer countries have to worry about providing health care to their employees?
    .
    Your entire rant has been more like “my six is more than your half dozen!” and trying to sell…………..nothing

  • 53_3

    Oh, and I did forget to mention that as premiums rise (and they already have, just last month!), more and more people will not be able to afford them – that’s rationing too, Rusty.

  • http://journeyhomeburke.wordpress.com/ journeyhomeburke

    The fact remains that big insurance by refusing care to patients and reimbursement to doctors over typos has ticked everyone off. They have a monopoly over the whole process and a well financed lobby team (including Lieberman’s wife) and representatives on both sides of the isle.

    A friend of mine recently laid off just he and his spouse is paying $2,500.00 dollars a month for his COBRA. Health insurance costs more than his mortgage. Anyone taking up the insurance industry’s cause doesn’t know what they are talking about.

    If you think the insurance companies are going to voluntarily lower their cost while having a monopoly over the process – you are being disingenuous …Over 60% of all US bankruptcies are attributable to medical problems. Most victims are middle class, well educated and have health insurance – (The American Journal of Medicine)

    The insurance companies and their representatives in Congress would love to perpetuate a business model that is crippling our overall economy – a bunch of great Americans aren’t they?

    90% of the wealth concentrated in 1% of the population is no way to run a country but a heck of a way to establish a royalty ruling class. Yacht sales can not sustain 350 million people. I’m for the public option, competition and a level playing field or break up the big insurers like we did AT&T.

    A slavish focus on profit margin might be good for the individual or a business, but it is one helluva lousy way to “govern” a Country. The GOP being a wholly owned subsidiary of Corporate America has a hard time with that concept.

    Paul Burke
    Author-Journey Home

  • cfukara

    We proclaim to the world that we, the Americans, are the kindest, cleverest, bestest, powerfullest, richest and, eh, most caring people on earth.

    And for proof …

    I wonder what the 50 million starving Americans without health care would say ..

    ” .. (President Morales of Bolivia, who was elected in a landslide victory on Sunday Dec 6, 2009) has lavished unprecedented social programs on the poor, including free medical care, stipends for new mothers and the elderly, and a massive program for literacy that includes payments to low-income families who make sure their children attend school.” - TIME, Dec 7, 2009

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1945989,00.html

    What the starving Americans would say?
    We would beat them over the head with the patriotic card and the anti-BHO race card – for a “yes!”

    Hey, do you really think that most of Beck’s loud teabaggers and August’s townhall howlers (who live from one paycheck to the next) have secure HC?

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/12/07/what-happens-if-liberal-senators-cash-in-their-public-option-chips/ What Happens If Liberal Senators Cash In Their Public Option Chips? – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] exchange for some rather hefty parting gifts. But before we get too far, let's clear one thing up – again. The public option “alternative” – which would replace the opt-out public plan currently in the [...]

  • cfukara

    Do you suppose that drug companies and insurance companies and most of the interest groups in the health care industry in Bolivia are asleep at the switch?

    Then I would rather have the sleepy ones.
    [Which is a sad commentary on the state of democracy and legislative process in our republic.]

  • http://aroundthesphere.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/its-dead-jim-part-ii/ It’s Dead, Jim, Part II « Around The Sphere

    [...] some rather hefty parting gifts. But before we get too far, let’s clear one thing up – again. The public option “alternative” – which would replace the opt-out public plan currently [...]

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/12/08/is-the-public-option-dead-plus-amendments-that-might-actually-matter/ Is the Public Option Dead? Plus, Drug Reimportation Amendment and the White House-PhRMA Deal – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] the public option is not Reid's only headache. As I've already noted, many of the amendments being offered on the Senate health reform bill are meaningless because they [...]

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/12/11/an-update-on-the-senate-health-reform-debate/ An Update on the Senate Health Reform Debate – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] Collins to offer a package of meaningful amendments. (I emphasize meaningful here because, as I've been noting, many of the amendments to the Senate bill are “message amendments” or “sense of the [...]

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/02/11/politicians-as-c-span-reality-stars/ C-SPAN Cameras and the Feb. 25 Health Care Summit – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] – almost none of which was intended to have any effect whatsoever on the final legislation. (I wrote a little about this back when it was [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus