End of Public Option?
Email ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports: The long slow death of the public option may be nigh. It has been clear for some time that Democrats in the Senate lack the votes to pass a public option. Several moderate Democrats and Independent Joe Lieberman have said they would filibuster the bill with Republicans if the bill has a public option. What remains is for progressives and conservatives within the Democratic caucus to coalesce around an alternative that can draw the moderates, but also progressives in the party who have committee only to support the public option. The latest idea: substituting a government-run public option with national private health plans overseen by the federal Office of Personnel Management. In exchange for relenting on the public option, progressives have suggested they could be satisfied by an expansion of Medicare eligibility – from 65 to 55. Details on all this are murky and there is no indication that accord has been reached. Would people under the age of 65 still only pay the $96.40 monthly premium that older Medicare recipients pay? All those issues have to be worked out. Instead of the public insurance option that Democratic leaders initially suggested, what is emerging in closed-door negotiations that began last week, stretched through the weekend, and continue today, is a proposal to expand what members of Congress and federal workers have – the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program. The plan is being modeled off a proposal called the SHOP Act, first introduced in 2008, that would have sought to create a national purchasing pool for small businesses and individuals who don’t get their insurance through work. Among the cosponsors of that bill were two Republicans Democrats are eying to ultimately join with them on a comprehensive reform bill – Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins from Maine. Lieberman was also a cosponsor of the SHOP Act, as were moderate Democrats like Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. The pool would be administered by OPM, the federal agency known as Office of Personnel Management. But it would rely on private insurers, although they would have to forego profits on the plans offered. Buying into the national pool would be one option in the regional exchanges envisioned in Democrats’ proposal. Federal employees already have options, particularly in areas where there are a lot of federal workers
It is unclear how much these benefits would cost for non-government workers, who already pay a premium, but are subsidized by their employer, the federal government. The group of 10 Senators – 5 progressives and 5 conservatives – have sent language for some ideas to the Congressional Budget Office for a cost assessment. That could take a week or more. If Democrats want to negotiate the parliamentary gauntlet in the Senate and pass a bill before Christmas, aides say they will have to have a deal between moderates and progressives, a CBO cost estimate, and language by early next week.
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Let’s blame Republicans!!!!
Posted by: Sir Toby Belch | December 7, 2009, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
Killing the public option is really a BUY-Partison effort. Let’s look at the facts I got from Center for Responsive Politics.
Mitch McConnell gets $ 2 million in political campaign contributions from the health sector.He gets $ 1 million from lobbyists. His top political donor is Kindred Health Care. Among the other top 20 campaign donors are Humana Inc, Blue Cross, and GalaxoSmithKline.
Joe Lieberman has gotten $2 million from the health care sector, which includes health insurance and pharmaceutical companies. He gets $ l million from lobbyists. Lieberman’s top 20 political donors include Aetna Health Insurance and Pfizer Pharmaceuticals.
Senator Richard Lugar’s top industrial backers are security and investment industries. Since health insurance industries are Wall Street’s latest darlings, Lugar has every reason for delaying. Lugar also gets $ 177,000 in political campaign contributions from the health sector. Eli Lilly Pharmaceuticals and Blue Cross/Blue Shield are among his top 20 political campaign contributors.
Orrin Hatch gets $ 977,000 from health care sector. His top industrial donor are pharmaceuticals and health products. Other top industrial donors include hospitals, nursing homes, and health insurance companies. Of top 20 individual political donors, Blue Cross takes 2nd place. Amgen, Eli Lilly Kindred Health Care are also among the top 20.
In terms of economic sectors, the health sector is Senator Tom Coburn’s biggest donor with a contribution of $ 193,000. The following are the top individual donors: Emergent Biosolutions, American Surgical hospitals, Neuroscience Specialists, the Oklahoma Heart Hospital, Amgen, Cardiology of Tulsa, and Purdue Pharma. All of these organizations stand to gain financially if Obama’s health care proposals fail to pass.
That good old feisty maverick John McCain has received $ 7 million from the health sector, including health insurance companies and pharmaceuticals during his political career $ 1.2 million of McCain’s campaign money comes from lobbyists who are now descending upon Washington Dc like locusts from a Biblical Plague in an effort to defeat Obama’s health care reforms. From 2005 to present McCain’s top 5 political contributors include Merrill-Lynch, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, all of which are reaping record profits from health insurance companies and pharmaceuticals.
All of to so-called “moderate” Democrats are nothing more than “moderate” crooks.
Of the top 20 industries that contribute to Ben Nelson’s political campaigns, the insurance industry takes 2nd place; 3rd place securities and investments; 4th place lobbyists; 5th place health professionals; and 7th place pharmaceuticals and health products. Over his political career, Ben Nelson has received $610,000 from the health sector and $ 739,000 from lobbyists.
His top 20 individual contributors include Amgen, Aetna, Healthsouth, Inc. IN addition, Nelson gets contributions from Altria, the nation’s tobacco company, and his top political contributor is NelNet, which finances student loans.
Over his political career, Kent Conrad has received $ 1 million in political campaign contributions from the health sector. In fact, insurance industry is Conrad’s 2nd larger campaign contributor
Max Baucus has received about $ 2 million in campaign contributions from the health sector. The insurance industry, pharmaceutical, and health care professions are among the top 20 contributors. Individual contributors include Goldman Sachs, Aetna, Amgen, BlueCross/Blue Shield, and Altria
The GOP and the Blue Dogs want to kill the public option because private insurance companies give them a kick back for doing so. Whenever you or your employer pays an insurance premium part of it goes to political campaign contributions. And since 2101 is an election year, expect your insurance premiums to sky-rocket.
My only question is why are you finding out this information from me, and NOT from ABC News?
Posted by: William Joseph Miller | December 7, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
Some people just don’t get it. Most people want to kill the public option as they will be worse off with it. That and we can’t afford it. Passing the costs onto our children is pretty shameful, but go ahead blame so mythical “big cat backing” majority who just don’t want this bad bill. Hope that is clear enough.
Posted by: jonny | December 7, 2009, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm
If the public option is done so is the bill. Tell the republicrats to take their chances with republicans. I don’t want my donations wasted on them.
Posted by: rightbehind | December 7, 2009, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
” Most people want to kill the public option as they will be worse off with it.”
Polls indicate most people want a public option. Indeed, a recent Ipsos/McClatchy asked a few extra questions and found that many people don’t support the current health care plan because the public option is *too weak*.
Posted by: jhw539 | December 7, 2009, 9:01 pm 9:01 pm
“Polls indicate most people want a public option. Indeed, a recent Ipsos/McClatchy asked a few extra questions and found that many people don’t support the current health care plan because the public option is *too weak*. ”
Time for you to get updated information.
Maybe a few months ago, not now.
Posted by: jonny | December 7, 2009, 9:40 pm 9:40 pm
Let me see, if I understand it, if you don’t get health care after this thing is passed you can go to jail however if you enter this country illegally you are rewarded and given access to health care. It appears that the real problem is government, career politicians have taken over and their first job priority is either getting elected or getting re-elected to office. Their next job priority which is far below the first is to pass legislation the people need. Ask yourself would you spend millions of dollars for a job which pays only slightly more than $200k per year and in the case of a member of the House of Representatives do it every two years? It is time to get rid of the career politician and get folks in office who are there to do the people’s business rather than line their own pockets. All present Congressmen and all running for Congress in the future should be asked to fully support proposed Constitutional amendment COE09E33. This is a simple easy to understand two page bill, Google COE09E33 to read it for yourself. This one simple bill would result in change that we the people could really believe in.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | December 7, 2009, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm
If OPM were to use a “Public Option” which is similar to the Federal Employees Health Benefit (FEHB) used by all Federal Employees and Congressmen it would require little work on the part of the government and it would satisfy Obama’s statement that “Congressmen have good health insurance and everyone should have access to the same insurance”. Contrary to what many believe Congressmen do not have FREE health insurance. Their employer is the federal government and like many employers, through FEHB it provides him and all federal employees with access to an insurance plan from a private insurance company (AETNA, Blue Cross, Health Net, Kaiser, etc). Congressmen have been required to get their health insurance in this manner since passage of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1983. The Congressman is responsible for any co-pays or deductable payments when service is provided by a healthcare provider. The Congressman is also susceptible to the limits within the plan he chooses, none of the plans cover 100% of the costs and the insured eventually reaches a point where he has to dig into his own pockets. OPM’s main involvement with the FEHB is to negotiate rates and benefits for each plan once a year. If you want to view the plans and their limits, deductibles, and co-pays just Google “FEHB” and go to the site and see what the different plans are.
The FEHB health plans are either nationwide (plan available anywhere within the country) or regional (plan available only in one state or a portion of a state) FEHB allows the Congressman to change between plans once a year during what is referred to as an open season and he can switch with no lapse in coverage due to pre-existing conditions and if he changes jobs within the Federal Government he can take his current plan with him if the plan is available (he moved from one region to another) at his new position, if not he can switch with no problems. If the government were to allow a pool of similar plans to the public the monthly premiums (based on the FEHB rate) for a family plan would roughly be between $425.00 and $1300.00, for an individual the monthly premium would roughly be between $177.00 and $550.00 and then everyone could have the same health care as our Congressmen. These rates would be lower if an employer were to choose to pay a portion of the health insurance as an employment benefit but it must also be realized that if employers are forced to pay for health insurance then wages will likely decrease or unemployment may rise to compensate for the added expense of the employer. One of the differences in the plan costs is the level of benefits provided and the amount the patient pays (co-pays or deductable) when receiving healthcare.
This would give everyone access to the same health insurance available to Congressmen. The government would not be subsidizing the insurance program as all enrolled in the program would be responsible for paying their premium and co-pay/deductable when medical services are provided. Let’s face it, with the unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security when coupled with the debt of the Federal Government there is no way that the government can realistically fund/subsidize health insurance for the populace.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | December 7, 2009, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm
Blue Dogs + Republicans + Corporate Donations = Sick Americans
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | December 7, 2009, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
Byron – You wrote “It is unclear how much these benefits would cost for non-government workers, who already pay a premium, but are subsidized by their employer, the federal government.”
This makes no sense as non-government workers are NOT subsidized by their employer, the federal government. The premium for a non-federal worker would include the whole premium (employee and government portion) paid by the federal worker minus any portion of the premium paid by the non-government workers employer. The federal government cannot subsidize the non-federal workers premium as the subsidy paid towards the federal employees premium is part of his compensation package for the labor he performs.
A little more proof reading next time.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | December 7, 2009, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
There is NO MONEY for health care. When the anointed one took office on January 20 2009 the debt of the federal government was $10.6 Trillion and as of 4 December 2009 it had increased to $12.1 Trillion which is roughly a 14% increase just in the time that this administration has been in charge. This administration is not responsible for all of the debt as the debt of the federal government has not decreased since the administration of Herbert Hoover. Only a thirteen of the forty-four administrations (James Madison, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford Hayes, Chester Arthur, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover) have actually decreased the federal debt over the history of our country. During this time the idiots in DC have used the accounting trick of borrowing money to balance the federal annual budget, in simple words spending beyond their means. If Joe Citizen were to use this practice he would end up in jail for this type of irresponsible spending.
Additionally the idiots have taken funds which were paid by the taxpayer into Social Security and Medicare and transferred the funds into the General Fund where it has been used to balance the annual budget. As both Medicare and Social Security do not pay out to the taxpayer until they are in their 60’s the unfunded liability of these programs just to pay those now paying into the system is $35.6T ($29.9T Medicare and $5.7T Social Security).
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that for the country to survive spending above the revenue taken in by the government MUST stop and the government MUST begin to pay down the federal debt NOW. TO spend any additional money which will increase the federal debt is totally irresponsible on the part of the idiots in DC.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | December 7, 2009, 11:41 pm 11:41 pm
You know if it had actually been bipartisan we may have been able to get a decent piece of legislation. That was what this president promised us. This hasn’t been transparent or bipartisan and it’s a mess.
Posted by: wow | December 8, 2009, 3:20 am 3:20 am
The public option, as written is nonsense. It does not accomplish a thing. It has been watered down so much that it is really like a cosmetic blemish. Why fight over it – its already been sidelined?
The whole bill is a mess – but then again, we need any kind of change so we will proably take anything that is passed.
The House, Senate, and (most blatantly) President Obama should be ashamed for turning a reform effort into a watered down piece of inflated junk. There is no real reform here. Most of what is accomplished is to put lots of people onto Medicaid – the worst option ever!
Our leaders should be ashamed that with all their time, intelligence and effort – that they couldn’t come up with anything but a clunker of a piece of junk. On top of that, this bill will cost us a bundle – a reasonable trade if reform were to take effect. But, as I said there is no real reform on the table in Congress.
Posted by: JonF | December 8, 2009, 5:55 am 5:55 am
It is all show, what these Democrats are doing. What bothers me more than what they are doing is they are not allowing Republicans into the committee. But in the end these Democrats will do what they are told to do and vote with the majority.
Posted by: Lara | December 8, 2009, 6:10 am 6:10 am
The Democrats are bankrupting the country. By 2018 the interest payment on the debt will be over $800B/yr, an unsustainable amount. The Democrat plan is to inflate the currency so the interest payments will be done in worthless currency. Of course, all of you who have savings will be wiped out, but those who have none will be smiling. This is the great wealth redistribution plan Obama talked about to steal your money. Any Republican or Democrat supporting deficit spending and big government must be unelected next fall.
Posted by: bryan | December 8, 2009, 7:43 am 7:43 am
This is the smartest option available to the Dems. They could get Nelson and Snowe on board in one swipe. Liberals will just have to get over it…
Posted by: Matt | December 8, 2009, 8:04 am 8:04 am
I guess ‘single payer’ is dead too them.
Posted by: LongT | December 8, 2009, 8:25 am 8:25 am
The public option died because politicians on both sides of the isle are in the health insurance lobby’s back pocket. The farce in all of this were the Democrats thinking they could railroad a bill down the people’s throat, but forgot that what they were doing is killing their own golden goose. I’ve decided to sit back and watch them obloviate about ‘what the people want’ and ‘how hard they work’.
Posted by: LongT | December 8, 2009, 8:32 am 8:32 am
The healthcare bill is a sham, and a lie. It will increase taxes, cut medicare, and it will massively expand the deficit. I have read about some of the people around Obama, and I have read Obama in his own words. Obama and his Progressive crowd are Neo-Marxist in my opinion. The want government power, bigger government, and they believe you need to be told how to run your life. The term liberalism refers to compassion and tolerance. So basically, you can be a liberal and conservative at the same time. The Neo-Marxist use the word liberalism as a tool to divide this country, and to seize power in the name of Social Justice. A Neo-Marxist believes the end justifies the means. Look the country is going broke, real broke. We are more dependent on foreign oil now than ever thanks to the Neo-Marxist Obama and crew. Taxes are going up, cost are going up, and in the words of Alan Greenspan this economy has no legs to stand on. So I say to the Moderate Democrats get rid of the Neo-Marxist crazy folks. This healthcare bill is a convoluted travesty that is meant as a tool to steal your freedom in the name of social justice, and Marxism.
Posted by: jon | December 8, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am
If the senate passes a 20 some pound Obamacare bill with a cost of $2.5 to $3.5 trillion in light of what it will contribute to the doubling of the national debt to an UNRESOLVABLE $24 trillion by 2019, that senate is as we say in the South “dumber than dirt”!
Has anyone looked at and speculated on the several new government agencies that will be created and funded out of our medicare cuts? Don’t tell me we can save money with more government agencies! I used to work for the government and about 10% of us did the work, go figure!
We don’t need more government, a look at its entitlement management history will reveal the government to be the problem not the solution. It would be cheaper to cut a check for each of the 17 million (realistic number) uninsured than to pass this disaster!
Posted by: Ed Taylor | December 8, 2009, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
This country needs a public option. Congress should quit worrying about whether they will get re-elected and just do the right thing for the people of this country.
Posted by: Marly | December 8, 2009, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm