TPMDC
Nelson Comes Out for Public Option with "Triggers"
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE).
Share
Send to a friend!
Yesterday, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) said he supports a public option...but only as a fallback mechanism if a modified health insurance market fails to provide affordable insurance to all consumers.
"If, somehow, the private market doesn't respond the way that it's supposed to...it would trigger a public option or a government-run option," Nelson said Sunday on CNN's State of the Union, "but only as a fail safe, backstop to the process. And when I say trigger ... I don't mean a hair trigger. I mean a true trigger."
Nelson is one of the Senate's most conservative Democrats, and, as such, often a barometer for the sorts of measures that might win the one or two Republican votes needed to overcome Republican filibusters. And, tellingly, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) has endorsed the idea of affixing the public option to a trigger.
Comments (28) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
vamonticello
September 7, 2009 9:10 AM
his position changes daily......only his final vote matters
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Minne sconsin
September 7, 2009 9:30 AM in reply to vamonticello
Only his final vote on cloture. What's with some of these blue dogs - can't they get the picture - we're not asking you to support your party's policies. We're just asking you not to actively block them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sbv
September 7, 2009 10:35 AM in reply to Minne sconsin
well said, if they can not be a part of the solution wanted by a vast majority of americans, regardless of what the msm has enabled and been played to this last month by a small, fringe, radicalized minority, then at the least, get out of the way. if they fear so much the radicalized, paranoid and distrustful minority that might come out in their next primary, at the least do not obstruct the real needs of a majority of their constituents.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
September 7, 2009 9:21 AM
Rather than educate and lead his constituents he panders to the unsophisticated being led by the demogogues.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
September 7, 2009 10:31 AM
Here are the gory details: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/health/policy/07health.html?_r=1&hpw
Brilliant. Only Max could come up with a plan that absolutely EVERYBODY- health care consumers AND insurance companies, Democrats and Republicans- will hate.
Shoot me now. (While I still have coverage my employer can afford.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
September 7, 2009 10:33 AM in reply to Steve LaBonne
Oh, sorry, didn't read the OP carefully- in my worst nightmares I didn't imagine that Baucus and Nelson would BOTH be coming out with their own horseshit plans at the same time. AAAAARRRRGH....
But in this case even Nelson is slightly better than Max! Unbelievable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
September 7, 2009 10:35 AM in reply to Steve LaBonne
The Baucus bill isn't going anywhere for the very reasons you describe.
With Nelson coming out pro-trigger, you can be assured that a trigger at least will be in the bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Philv
September 7, 2009 1:20 PM in reply to Stroszek
I agree, if even Nelson supports a position, you can get 60 votes for cloture, 51+ for the bill. The critical question that needs light shone on it is what is this trigger going to look like, because (just like, ahem "public option"), "trigger" can mean a lot of different things.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ru4862
September 7, 2009 10:58 AM
You know, i cannot understand why the president would ask Liberals and Progressives to compromise on the public option? Yet, he puts NO pressure on centrist democrats to support the public option.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
September 7, 2009 11:18 AM
Anyone who falls for the trigger b.s. ought to have their vote taken away due to cognitive deficit. They're not only screwing you, they're laughing at you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
creo13
September 7, 2009 11:30 AM
Has anyone discussed what the trigger would be and how it will be constructed? Will it go by rates? What would keep insurance companies from hiking rates until the trigger is supposed to kick in?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
September 7, 2009 11:45 AM
Considering that every possible reason for pulling the trigger already exists, what is the difference between a public option and a trigger? Starting 15 years ago the insurance industry was going to get its act together. I think 15 years is long enough to wait. They've had enough time. Pull the trigger.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
September 8, 2009 1:11 PM in reply to Texas Aggie
Window dressing. Nelson, bought and paid for, will support a "trigger" that is defined so as to let insurance companies make more money without ever really approaching the possibility that a public option would be allowed to exist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
neesy08
September 7, 2009 11:56 AM
If Nelson wants it, then it is NOT a good idea!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
September 7, 2009 12:11 PM in reply to neesy08
Yep. I still have a hard time getting my arms around the fact that buffoons from these tiny states have so much power. The mayor of LA or NY doesn't have this much power and they have more than 5 times the population of Nebraska. This country is sooooo screwed up. We will never be able to get anything done.
By the way, STFU bennie. I don't care what you have to say.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
September 8, 2009 11:25 AM in reply to Michael A
Michael, this is why Congress has two chambers - one with equal representation (Senate) and one with representation based on population (House of Representatives).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
September 7, 2009 1:09 PM
Here is a cogent argument against a trigger.
If we can't pass a robust public option, with a left of center Democratic President, 256 Democrats in the House, and 59 Democrats in the Senate (soon to be 60 again), what the blank makes you think a trigger will be imposed on the health insurance industry in the future?
We're going to have fewer, not more, democrats in Congress in the future. The Democrats are at the peak of their power; right now! WE gave them that.
So future Congresses will be lobbied even harder, and given increasing sums, to prevent any potential trigger from being forced on the industry.
People need to wake up and get a clue and accept human nature for what it is.
If we don't get a robust public option of some type now; we never will.
Progressives need to stand their ground. And the President needs to support them.
If that means no bill, than no bill it is. As more and more baby boomers retire and go on Medicare, the health insurance industry will die a slow painful death anyway over the next decade. If there is no individual mandate.
They've already lost 9 million customers since 2000 because of employers dropping coverage as well as individuals because of cost. That loss rate is going to really start ballooning soon.
Then they will be screaming for reform.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
September 7, 2009 1:14 PM in reply to willia451
That is why they should push through medicare for all and be done with it. The dems are at the peak of their power and will lose seats in 2010. Medicare for all. Simple, easy to sell, and hard to argue with.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Philv
September 7, 2009 1:22 PM in reply to Michael A
Great! I'm assuming that since this is so easy, we'll be seeing it any day now. And the changes to how Medicare operates to help lower medical costs around the country...?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
September 7, 2009 1:27 PM in reply to Philv
Sure. Costs will be dramatically reduced due to the following:
1. No insurance company profits.
2. No huge administrative costs that are incurred by design to deny people coverage. Medicare already covers the age group, over 65, that needs healthcare the most.
3. No subsidies to the pharma industry. The us subsidizes world drug prices.
Easy sell:
1. Over 65 likes medicare.
2. Doctors and hospitals like medicare and hate fighting with ins. companies.
3. Makes for a good bumper sticker and pits republicans against medicare, which they are trying to avoid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
atticus1104
September 7, 2009 1:56 PM
This trigger idea is nonsense. My question is, how removed from reality are these right wing wackos when they do not think that the insurance industry is making obscene profits? Case in point, George Will in this video.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2815
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
September 7, 2009 6:27 PM in reply to atticus1104
It is, unfortunately, President Obama who is so removed from reality that he thinks no public option is both health care reform and a ticket to reelection.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
StefanoC
September 7, 2009 6:57 PM
According to Saturday's Washington Post, roughly twelve Democratic senators are likely to oppose a public option, getting the tally down to 47-52, with the former number dropping to 46 with the exclusion of Robert Byrd. This does not bode well for a cloture petition for a public option bill, much less for the prospects of final passage.
We are all in agreement that Ben Nelson is nothing more than a detestable troll. That should not, however, cloud the minds of reform supporters about what is really at stake here. taking a principled stand on a public option would doom the final passage of a bill. With a healthcare implosion, kiss goodbye any public faith in the Presiden'ts ability to lead his party. The narrative would shift to the point that the Obama administration would be looked upon as a complete failure, and the Democratic-controlled Congress would be a laughingstock. Principles are fine things, but they are not worth the election of a President Romney.
Passing legislation is all about compromise. The passage of the 1957 was a scaled-back version originally championed by liberals. Though its scope was limited, it ultimately eased the passage of more substantial legislation in the following decade. Something is better than nothing, as it enables us to fight another day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
September 7, 2009 7:58 PM
Fucking whore.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Andreams
September 8, 2009 8:55 AM
I'd rather have a trigger than bucket loads of local co-ops. How in the world could they compete with national companies? They cannot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
September 8, 2009 11:18 AM
He's in favor of a trigger that goes off in about 5 years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
September 8, 2009 12:50 PM
This trigger will be pulled how, exactly? If it requires a vote in Congress, then it is nothing, zero, nada. The insurance companies will just fight it off then, just as they're doing now. If the trigger is tied to some "objective" conditions, how are those going to be measured? Are we really supposed to believe that creative insurance company bookkeeping and lots of political cash won't keep it from the trigger from ever being pulled? Shit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OldenGoldenDecoy
September 8, 2009 5:31 PM
Trigger?
Centrist Democrat? Hah!
In 2001, Nelson had no problem helping to craft the proposal of the Bush tax cuts of $1.3 trillion and budget request of $2 trillion in federal spending. Sounds like a pretty good Republican to me.
This trigger crap is just another limp back-boned middle-of-nowhere Democrat attempting to polish a turd... so to speak.
Nelson represents how many square miles of corn and soybeans? Now take a look who he really is beholden to ... Open Secrets Ben Nelson
Now here's a Cafe blog post of mine posted yesterday that pretty much sums up these latest backroom diversionary tactics that are now bubbling up from swamp in DC.
Triggers ... Co-Ops ... The Public Option ... and Sand ...
That is all . . .
~OGD~
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?