TPMDC

Carper Floats Public Option Alternative Viewed Skeptically By Conservatives and Liberals


Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Senate Finance Committee member Tom Carper (D-DE)--who voted against a robust public option amendment but for a more modest public option amendment Tuesday--is quietly circulating a public option alternative that doesn't involve triggers but also wouldn't create a national public option.

Carper's proposal, according to Politico, would allow individual states to decide whether to create their own public options, or co-ops, or other alternative to private insurance. That's a plan that sounds intriguing to public option skeptics and even some more liberal Democrats, but it's also a significant departure from the public plan envisioned by reformers, which would be available nationwide without delay.

Liberal critics will charge that, while the plan doesn't involve triggers, it does lack the heft that a plan organized at the national level would have to bargain down prices with providers; and conservative critics will oppose it on the same grounds upon which they oppose the traditional public option. And unfortunately for Carper, those critics include some high profile senators including Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Susan Collins (R-ME), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), and Robert Menendez (D-NJ).

But with the public option's fate in doubt in the Senate, it could nonetheless become an attractive alternative down the line. If Carper officially introduces the proposal, it'll be worth keeping an eye on.

Comments (12) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

October 1, 2009 9:32 AM   

GOP Supports Public Option for Fetuses, to Expire at Birth
http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=9084

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:22 AM   

It is somewhat intriguing but it's main problem is that the PO's main strength is the national clout it would have to lower prices. I rather have states be given the choice of SP. Now we are having a conversation

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:25 AM    in reply to theone718

I rather have states be given the choice of SP.

that would be an interesting turn

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:27 AM    in reply to theone718

I LIKE that idea. States rights, etc.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

sbv

user-pic

October 1, 2009 11:28 AM    in reply to theone718

that's what i have been thinking? why can't states decide to offer SP? would this then give them enough clout to have the ability to negotiate lower prices? what if states banded together?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:45 AM   

"Floats" is quite apt in this case

this is the most rank to date - he is proposing a trigger for co ops - Conrad's plan is Single-Payer by comparison.

for goodness sake, the man has cited the phantom trigger for Medicare Part D as an example

and all that fluffery about no staked position ??

really ?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/09/at-white-house-obama-urged-to-back-public-option-as-fallback-to-private-plans.html#comments

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:53 AM   

Maybe this is good news.

If Carper can float an idea for some sort of Public Option, no matter how lame, then perhaps he can be counted on to, at least, not filibuster a real public option.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 10:55 AM   

If the public option completely fails, some state should set up their own to challenge the current Federal prohibition against it. At the end of the obvious lawsuit, I'd love to see the opinions of the Supreme Court Justices that support reducing the scope of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 12:53 PM   

This is a terrible idea. Insurance companies have a much easier time lobbying individual state legislatures.

I will stop voting for Democrats if they fail to pass a bill with a robust public option.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 1, 2009 1:11 PM   

I just called Sen. Mendez's office. I was told that he supports a robust public option and that he is against a trigger.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

mcc

user-pic

October 1, 2009 1:37 PM   

Coops are a joke. Their support base is like 2 or 3 conservadems and no one else. Not even Snowe likes them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

October 2, 2009 10:31 AM   

This option has merit, especially if, as I understand it, states would be allowed to enter compacts with each other to form large bargaining units. It would not be my first choice,(I would prefer the state option of a single payer plan), but it is much better than either a "trigger" (which only triggers years of scare mongering and Republican election gains) or co-ops (which is just another name for insurance company). If it works well, business will be attracted to the states that jointly operate an effective public option, and that means jobs. It would also be good politics.

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