By Julie Percha

Feb 23, 2010 3:16pm

Today’s Qs for O’s WH

At the top of the briefing, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs announced that the president was endorsing he revocation of the antitrust exemption currently enjoyed by the health insurance industry.

TAPPER: Can you talk a little bit more about this statement of administration policy regarding the antitrust exemption?  Why specifically now?  How long has the president been planning on coming out in favor of this?  

GIBBS:  Well, the –   
  
TAPPER: He's been hinting about it for quite some time.
 
GIBBS:  Well, the House is considering, in their legislative vehicle — this legislation goes to the Rules Committee today and it's my understanding, goes to the floor either tomorrow or the day after that.  We typically weigh in at this part — point in the process with a statement of administration policy — it's been evaluated by a number of departments throughout government — and believe that this is –removing this exemption will allow appropriate enforcement and examination of potential policies that might prove uncompetitive, might stifle competition.  And we think this better promotes affordability and innovation through greater choice and less market concentration.
     
TAPPER: I think it was either a few weeks ago or a few months ago  the president said, I think in one of the weekly addresses, that it  was time for Congress to consider repealing the antitrust exemption.  Do you have evidence that there's any, as you put it, bid rigging or  price fixing?  Is that why you became more solidly in favor of this?
  

GIBBS:  Well, we do know this, Jake, that the AMA studied the market concentration of health insurers and found that 94 percent of the U.S. health insurance markets were highly concentrated, meaning you know, one or only a few health insurers offering policies in, as I said, almost all the markets in the country. This allows DOJ and the — and FTC the ability to look into, in complement with state insurance regulations, to ensure competitiveness.   
   
TAPPER: Okay.  And for — about Thursday's summit, it doesn't really seem like it's shaping up, right now, to seem all that bipartisan on Thursday.  You have Republicans saying it's going to be a “Democratic infomercial.”  The fact that the president posted his plan on whitehouse.gov is indicative of a lack of sincerity on his part, they say.
 
GIBBS:  Well –
  
TAPPER: And then for your guys' part, the bill that you've posted  is not just a bill the president supports, it's also a vehicle to get  this through Congress without any Republican support.
  
GIBBS:  Again, Jake, the bill is a starting point for what Congress had spent many months considering.  The — what we get out of Thursday will be, as I said yesterday, based on the willingness of  those participating to come in with an open mind and discuss the ideas and the plans that they have. Was it disappointing that Senate Republicans appear to have decided not to post their plan on the Internet for discussion, or for the Republicans to come with a more consensus plan?  Sure that's disappointing.  I hope that doesn't wipe away their willingness to  actively discuss the ideas that they have to cut costs for those that  are drowning, small businesses and families, government budgets, and  those that are being discriminated against by the practices of  insurance companies.   
 
TAPPER: But doesn't the fact that you've posted it in the form you've posted it, which is not just a list of principles or a statement of legislation –  
 
GIBBS:  No –
  
TAPPER: — but I mean, look, I mean, we all know that –
   
(Cross talk.)    
  
GIBBS:  In fairness — in fairness — in fairness — in fairness –    
 
TAPPER:  — for reconciliation if it comes — if it comes to that.

GIBBS:  Jake, in fairness, I can assume if we would have simply posted principles, they would have said why isn't there more information.  Look, semantics aside, the president looks forward to discussing actively for several hours — with members of his administration, Democrats and Republicans — their ideas for health- care reform. I think again — I can't stress enough, I think the product, the output of six hours of discussion will be based on every participant's willingness to come and have an honest and frank discussion. I don't think it does any good if somebody says, we’re not going there to offer our ideas.  We're just going there to help people understand how bad the other guy's ideas are.  That's not what the American people are looking for. They're looking for Democrats and Republicans who are willing to sit around a  table and work together, to provide solutions to problems like health  care, the rising costs of health care.  That's what the president sees as his hope for what happens on Thursday. 

TAPPER: One last thing, I'm sorry.  Congressman Joe Sestak last week said that the White House offered him a high-ranking job in the administration to not run against Arlen Specter.  Do you guys have any comment on that?    
  
GIBBS:  I was traveling for a couple of days, as you know.  I have seen some stuff that he said.  But I have not looked into this, Jake.   

- jpt

User Comments

Ummm. The GOP plan has been on the WH website since October.

Posted by: DJ | February 23, 2010, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm

The markets are concentrated because each state, by law, is a seperate market. Unless a state has a huge population, there are only a limited number of risk pools that are large enough to survive actuarially.
The antitrust exemption is virtually irrelevant, and tts repeal won’t affect anything. These amateurs are really desperate at this point.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | February 23, 2010, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

If the Democrats, with huge majorities in both houses of Congress can’t come up with a single bill, why does the Administration keep insisting that the Republican group have one “consensus” bill.
Isn’t the fact that there are 3 or 4 different versions Republican health plans just one more example of how they have a Big Tent, as Mr. Ryan C would say.
That is the latest excuse for Democrat ineptitude in solving this nation’s problems. The Democrats just have too big of a tent and too many ideas.
So which one is it? Should the Republicans have one proposal or many. Is it a big tent or grand bargain. I’m just a stupid voter that hasn’t been communicated to well. Please come save me from my small brain.

Posted by: Aaron | February 23, 2010, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm

Where is the story about the 9 lawyers who work in the department of justice,who have been representing the detainees of Gitmo. We have terrorist sympatherizers working in the justice department.Eric Holder needs to go this is not the only time he has sided with terrorists,he did so when the Clinton pardon fiasco took place.

Posted by: stormerF2 | February 23, 2010, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm

Regarding the changes at ABC News, my vote is for Tapper as host of This Week. But please, Jake, ditch the stare and smile more.

Posted by: jcarob | February 23, 2010, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm

TAPPER: One last thing, I’m sorry. Congressman Joe Sestak last week said that the White House offered him a high-ranking job in the administration to not run against Arlen Specter. Do you guys have any comment on that?
GIBBS: I was traveling for a couple of days, as you know. I have seen some stuff that he said. But I have not looked into this, Jake.
Add Ken Salazar and you have two federal law violations, an impeachable offense. Maybe this question should be directed to the Attorney General or, hopefully an independent prosecutor. Do you think they might be traveling out of town for a few days and get back to you!

Posted by: pauldia | February 23, 2010, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm

“Add Ken Salazar and you have two federal law violations, an impeachable offense. Maybe this question should be directed to the Attorney General or, hopefully an independent prosecutor.”
ROFLMAO!
American Spectator last seen collecting old condoms from Bill Clinton is on the case!

Posted by: Ryan C | February 23, 2010, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm

Since Gibbs says that Obama didn’t include a public option because it won’t pass, how about asking him this tomorrow -
“Exactly who are the ten Senators who are willing to kill the public option that Obama promised us?”

Posted by: Flash Override | February 23, 2010, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

Add Ken Salazar and you have two federal law violations, an impeachable offense. Maybe this question should be directed to the Attorney General or, hopefully an independent prosecutor.”
ROFLMAO!
American Spectator last seen collecting old condoms from Bill Clinton is on the case!
I guess if it makes you feel better to deflect with sarcasm so be it, but ABC News’s Jake Tapper asked the question for a reason, & Robert Gibbs refused to answer for a reason. The reason is either Sestak and Salazar are remarkably lying about the same circumstance or the administration committed a serious crime. While you do not want to know the truth for partisan reasons, ABC is asking the question for the vast majority of it’s audience. I hope the question keeps being asked.

Posted by: pauldia | February 23, 2010, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm

Here’s another good question for Gibbs:
Since Sarah Palin gets socialized health care through Indian Health Services and the Alaska Native Medical Center, why do you think she believes that socialized medicine would kill her baby?

Posted by: Flash Override | February 23, 2010, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm

Gibbs: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah…about every imaginable topic.
.
Jake: asks question about illegal activity.
.
Gibbs: sound of crickets chirping…
.
Followup questions about this???? Anybody else in the worthless news media willing to dig into this issue?

Posted by: gk | February 23, 2010, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm

pauldia wrote: “While you do not want to know the truth for partisan reasons, ABC is asking the question for the vast majority of it’s audience. I hope the question keeps being asked.”
.
Somehow I don’t expect ABC to keep asking this question. Usually what happens when one of the news media stumbles across a good question like this and gets an obvious stonewall from Gibbs… the rest of the media act like they tripped on the sidewalk… they pick themselves up, look over their shoulder to see if anyone was watching, and then carry on about their normal way.

Posted by: gk | February 23, 2010, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm

Gibbs would have you believe he is the most intellectually incurious press secretary in the history of that post. “I’ve heard what he said but I’ve been away and haven’t looked into that claim”– right! Another in a long list of “I don’t have anything on that” and “I will have to look into that for you” responses. He never seems to have the facts at hand to give a definitive answer to any question that strays from the talking points he’s pushing for the day. How do you put up with him, Mr. Tapper?

Posted by: moderate | February 23, 2010, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm

Jake, you have one hell of a nerve asking the POTUS’ Press Secretary questions in which WE might have an interest in hearing Obama’s views..I don’t want the job, but I honestly would like to throw your hat into the ring……..I am sure we would have at least far fewer…..errrrs…………ahhhs….and ummms. Have fun watching the Westwingers in the newest comedy “The President’s Healthcare Tea Party ” on Thursday……..I hear it will be an oscar-winning “performance.”….with a cast including Pontius Pelosi and Rambo Reid, how can it lose?

Posted by: justj joey | February 24, 2010, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm

It isn’t surprising that some of the Repubs are complaining about the white house posting their health reform plan on the internet. If the White House hadn’t they would have complained something was being hidden from the public. Either way they will complain.
I think putting the insurance companies back under anti-trust legislation will be a great idea. Right now, there is virtually no real competition amongst them.
The fact is the insurance companies don’t want this change means one thing: it will be good for us, the consumer.
That’s something I wish I could say personally to every tea party person, wake up and realized you are being played by the insurance companies. If the insurance companies are spending millions to fight health insurance reform you can be sure it isn’t because they fear for the consumer but their bottom line.
Even among those who comment here, think about their reasons to object. Are they working for an insurance company, do they own stock in them?
If not, how can the fact that 45,000 Americans die every year because they don’t have health insurance not bother them?

Posted by: Lydia | February 24, 2010, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm

The Democrats, and our glorious leader, are still shooting themselves in the foot. Anti-trust regs have been and are in place for health care corporations. They just aren’t enforced. But while Obama will say he’s sorry to lose the Republicans, he KNEW he was going to lose most of the Democrats by deep-sixing the public option this time, and never really supporting the single-payer, universal care.

Posted by: mjc | February 24, 2010, 3:33 pm 3:33 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.