TPMDC

Pelosi Works the Inside Game for the Public Option


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

A number of reports suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reversed a July deal she and Democratic health care leaders struck with Blue Dogs that weakened the public option.

But though that's not accurate to the letter, it is indicative of a private fight Pelosi's waging to keep a public option--preferably a strong one--in the final bill.

The deal with the Blue Dogs was tactically crucial, allowing the House bill to pass by the slimmest of margins in the Energy and Commerce committee. But several weeks later, one of the parties to that deal, Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR)--chairman of the Blue Dogs' health care task force--announced that he will vote against any bill that creates a public option, and it's safe to say that the defection didn't go unnoticed.

Aides caution that the final shape of the public option--whether it will use Medicare reimbursement rates, or whether those rates will be negotiated by the government--is still being decided. And Pelosi's facing pressure from other Democratic leaders to be flexible on the question. But behind the scenes and in public, Pelosi continues to make the case that health care reform should include a public option, and that the public option should be more robust.

And according to Roll Call, she'd like the bill the House votes on to be completed and ready for a CBO score by the end of this week, ahead, she hopes, of a mid-October vote.

Pelosi has a tough needle to thread particularly given the Senate's aversion to endorsing a public option. And though her public adamancy has softened, she's clearly working the inside game.

Comments (6) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (2)

September 23, 2009 9:47 AM   

you mean the mike ross who sold his family pharmacy to an anti-reform chain for MUCH more than it is likely worth?

http://www.propublica.org/article/arkansas-rep-sold-family-pharmacy-to-chain-with-stake-in-health-care-922

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 12:50 PM    in reply to fkaZk0sm0

This is a key thing. Beats the living shit out of me why Josh & Co. don't have a piece on it over at The Muck and why someone hasn't been assigned to dig more into the story. It's nice that Pro Publica and several other Progressive Blogs have picked up on it. But... Peabody, folks? TPM has cha-ching, and that Peabody came from the work done over at The Muck. This is a hot little story in the healthcare debate about a key person within the Dem Caucus who helped kill off healthcare in 1994 and is up to his old games again. Last time it was to prep himself for a Senate run. This time there is no political reason for it given the demographics of his district, which is actually to the *left* of his Blue Dog policies. Instead, this time around he's largely selling himself to Big Health contributions. This one skips the campaign contribution game and instead puts it right in his pockets.

John

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 10:59 AM   

When only 29 million Americans have access to the public option, whether or not the public option uses Medicare reimbursement rates or rates negotiated by the government won't make much difference in health care savings. What makes the most difference in health care savings is the number of people who have access to the public plan and other plans in the Exchange. The more people who have access to the Exchange, the more savings there will be. In the Exchange, the government subsidizes only the cost of the cheapest plan for a given plan generosity; with employer-provided health benefits, the government subsidizes everything. That's a major savings if government doesn't subsidize the difference in cost between a plan that has unlimited choice of doctor and one with the same level of generosity that has a narrower network.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 11:30 AM   

I think the trick is for Pelosi and other leaders who support a strong public plan to work behind the scenes. We've given Baucus and turncoat Conrad plenty of time to put together a devilish bill that no one will support. Now it's time to get the House bill passed -- even if by one vote -- and then get it through the senate -- even by one vote.

We can't allow people like MIke Ross to hijack the debate. They've had their turn. We've seen it. How many would support the Baucus bill? Not fifty U.S. Senators. Heck, I suspect that less than 40 U.S. Senators would support it. And, I suspect that less than 150 House members would support it, either.

So, we have to figure out a way to get a decent final bill.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 4:12 PM   

A lot of people don't like Nancy. She doesn't seem to care. That's what I like about Nancy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 4:13 PM   

How interesting the way posts that show the Democrats actually getting something beneficial done elicit very little interest.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on