TPMDC

Baucus: The Public Option Is Alive...We're Just Not Sure What Type

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!


Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

On a conference call with reporters moments ago, Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus said that the public option is still alive, adding, in a familiar refrain, that the question for Democrats now is what kind of public option can get 60 votes.

The goal, Baucus said, was to include something in the bill that keeps premiums down and keeps insurance companies honest. "We just need to find ways to help reach that goal, in addition to the provisions in the bill," Baucus said.

Baucus cited several permutations of public option proposals under discussion, including what he described as "Medicare light [the robust public option], even playing field [proposed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), there's co-ops--that's private, not public--there's opt in, opt out," Baucus said.

"It's alive," Baucus said. "We're trying to see what makes the most sense."

The admission is a fairly candid one for Baucus, who typically demurs at the mention of the public option, and pivots to the idea that the priority for Democrats ought to be a bill that can get 60 votes.

And he did ultimately hit that point, casting doubt on the idea that a health care bill that includes a public option that pays hospitals and doctors at Medicare-like rates, could overcome a filibuster. "I don't know if there's 60 votes for the more pure kind of public option, maybe for the less pure kinds," Baucus said.

But he declined to elaborate on just which compromises might succeed. "It's just It's too early to tell. We met, our group...last, I guess it was Thursday. We're meeting again today....There are a lot of meetings going on, to try to determine the answer to that question," Baucus said. "Maybe none, maybe one of them."

Join the Conversation!

18 comments

Recommend Recommend (0)

October 19, 2009 2:57 PM   

In this photo, he looks like a refugee from a 1960s sci-fi show.

Or is that off-topic?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:02 PM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

Not at all! That's exactly what I was moved to comment on. I can only imagine the kind of cars that expression has moved off the lot!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 4:26 PM    in reply to Schmed- ley

Oh, GOD, that is rich! Thanks!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 20, 2009 6:14 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

The look says: 'Public option? Baby have I got a public option for you!' (heh-heh...catastrophic policy with a $10,000 deductible at the low low price of $700/month)

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 20, 2009 10:37 AM    in reply to Tanjaoui

Right on the money!

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:18 PM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

In that regard he has company -- the head of the Chamber of Commerce, as seen in another TPM story today

http://bit.ly/3kCviq

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 4:29 PM    in reply to SkippyFlipjack

Ah, yes! The CHAMBER! How about that for some SMOOTHIES!!

Ha-hah! You betcha!!

-- OT

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:19 PM   

"I don't know if there's 60 votes for the more pure kind of public option, maybe for the less pure kinds,"

So which Democrats are joining the republicans for a bi-partisan filibuster?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:43 PM    in reply to Indie Pro

Damn if I didn't log on to make that same point. We now know a robust option has 52 votes. That's all it needs, unless one of the remaining eight want to join with the Republicans in opposing cloture.

. . . or, God forbid, unless Robert Byrd doesn't make it to the floor the day of the cloture vote.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:31 PM   

If there are federal penalties, there had better be federal insurance. If I can't opt out of a penalty, why should my state be able to opt out of affordable coverage?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:41 PM   

"The Public Option Is Alive...We're Just Not Sure What Type"

In other news, Max Baucus has a brain . . . we're just not sure whether it's in his head or up his ass.

"I don't know if there's 60 votes for the more pure kind of public option"

There shouldn't have to be 60 votes because every member of the Caucus should be required to vote for filibuster on penalty of losing their chairmanships and the privileges of being members of the majority. All they should need is 51 votes (or 50 plus Biden).

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:48 PM    in reply to Moose49

CHANGE THE ABOVE TO "vote for cloture"

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 4:51 PM    in reply to Moose49

And I would add: No strong public option? No cloture.

Opt out (default in) is the only possible bargaining chip. It should be like Medicare.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 3:56 PM   

Hey did you read about the new shenanigans some of these right wing nut job Senators are trying to inject into the bill?

Senators trying to insert measures into the health care reform initiatives that will pay for "religious" treatments, such as Christian Science prayer. Indeed, one of these, S.1679, entitled Affordable Health Choices Act requires the government or private party insurers to pay for faith-based therapies

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 4:40 PM   

This guy is living in fantasy land. Healthcare reform cannot pass Congress without a strong PO. Something along the lines of the Rockefeller or Schumer amendments that were defeated (by Democrats) in the Finance Committee markup.

Progressives WILL kill the bill if its not included.

Check out Darcy Burner on Top Line:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/10/top-line-would-liberals-sink-health-care-reform.html

That about says it all.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 5:50 PM   

I'm glad I am retired and getting my social security and free medical (relatively).

Those of you in your 30's - 50's will be taxed to death (in one way or another), there will be no social security, medical will be costly and after a certain age virtually non existent due to the magic PO.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 9:16 PM    in reply to amabo666

What makes you think Medicare and Social Security are safe, if dems can't be bothered to remain united for something most of the country wants?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 19, 2009 5:51 PM   

I could go along with the Schumer PO. As long as we HAVE a PO it is something we can build on. I would also go along with an opt out.

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