TPMDC
Rockefeller: White House Approach To Public Option 'Difficult To Fathom' Sometimes
Brian Beutler | October 21, 2009, 3:54PM
Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!
Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
Share
Send to a friend!
I just spoke with Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), who had a bit of a fractured take on the current state of the public option. He took issue with the President Obama's aloof approach to the public option, and at the same time echoed one of the administration's most controversial lines.
"They're a little difficult to fathom sometimes, to keep up with what they're doing," Rockefeller said. "They're in these meetings, all of these meetings, that I don't get to go to so I can't tell you exactly what they're saying."
But he also said something that seems a bit at odds with his consistent, emphatic support for the measure, which he has described as a necessary element of reform. "You know, the public option--which I think in the end is going to prevail--is not actually the biggest thing in the entire bill," Rockefeller told me. "I hate to hear myself say that, but it's true."
Earlier today, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)--another ardent public option enthusiast--said much the same thing after an event heralding a plan to strip the health insurance industry of its anti-trust exemption.
Rockefeller said that he thinks the cost-saving nature of the public option should be used to appeal to conservative Democrats, while suggesting he's open to one of the most talked about compromises. "I'm looking very much now at this opt out public option--not opt in but opt out--so you start out with a public option, and if you don't like it you can opt out....that has a sense of freedom."
There may be a sense in the caucus that it's important--for perhaps more than one reason--not to inflate expectations about the public option, particularly given the dramatic developments in the House. But Rockefeller did say he thought the public option would prevail. And in that regard, he's in agreement with Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) who didn't mince words.
"This bill's going to have public option when it comes out of the Senate, it's going to have an even stronger public option when it comes out of conference," Brown told me.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
- Palin Advocates War With Iran After Apparently Misunderstanding Buchanan Column (VIDEO)
- Jon Stewart: Obama's Teleprompter Is No Match For Palin's 'Mavericky Notecard Hand-Scribbled Buzzwords' (VIDEO)
- Colbert: 'Sarah Palin Is A F--king Retard' (VIDEO)
- At A Whole New Level
- What's the Deal with The Ryan Budget?
- Cheney, Ridge Pioneered Miranda Attack On Obama
- Backhanded Compliment
- Gibbs Mocks Palin And Writes Shopping List On Hand (VIDEO)
- Cheney, Ridge Pioneered Miranda Attack On Obama
- History
- Gibbs Mocks Palin And Writes Shopping List On Hand (VIDEO)
- Palin Advocates War With Iran After Apparently Misunderstanding Buchanan Column (VIDEO)
- House GOP-ers: Start Over And We'll Come To The Table. White House: No.
- Bachmann: 'Wean Everybody Off' Social Security And Medicare
- Ben Nelson Helps GOP Block Obama NLRB Nominee
- Jon Stewart: Obama's Teleprompter Is No Match For Palin's 'Mavericky Notecard Hand-Scribbled Buzzwords' (VIDEO)
- Allegations Against Leader Cause Turmoil In CA GOP
- Cheney, Ridge Pioneered Miranda Attack On Obama
- Deconstructing Rush Limbaugh
- Bachmann: 'If We Reject Israel, Then There Is A Curse That Comes Into Play'
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
johnmccsf
October 21, 2009 3:57 PM
Sorry to break it to Beutler/Sargent and the rest of the Pajama Gang....
It isn't
Never has been
(and I support it)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Miles
October 21, 2009 5:34 PM in reply to johnmccsf
The subsidies are actually the biggest deal. That said, without a public option, it falls apart.
I'm gonna reiterate my preference for an opt-out clause, which is decided by state-level referenda in 2010. That's a much better-case scenario than straight PO.
Low turnout no more! Also, every state will vote to participate, so it won't matter. Who doesn't want lower prices?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
October 21, 2009 4:01 PM
No reason to call the Commisars just because he said it in public.
It's not the biggest thing in the bill. It's just turned out to be the biggest thing in the bill that's hard.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
October 21, 2009 4:09 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
True that
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 21, 2009 4:09 PM
He's actually putting it in context! Now if many progressives could simply do the same, we could have a rational discussion about Healthcare Reform.
It's always easier to shout "Public Option or Death" than to read a lengthy bill and digest its implications.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 21, 2009 4:10 PM in reply to Dorn76
And I also support it, and think it's a necessary part of any bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
October 21, 2009 4:34 PM in reply to Dorn76
Public option or individual mandates?
Public option or premium subsidies?
Public option or policy rescission ban?
Public option or repeal of anti-trust exemption?
(Permutate with Public Option - Medicare rates, negotiated rates, opt out, triggers (hair or hard), public or privately administered)
Reality bites doesn't it
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
October 21, 2009 4:45 PM in reply to johnmccsf
These shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
Public option AND individual mandates, e.g.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
October 21, 2009 4:36 PM in reply to Dorn76
Better in the bill than not
Better weak than not
Better a bill than TOTAL FAILURE to govern
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 21, 2009 4:34 PM in reply to Dorn76
I hear ya! But I think it is a little unfair. PO is still firmly on the table, and mainly because of the progressive flanks of the debate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
October 21, 2009 4:15 PM
He's right the PO isn't the most important thing in the bill. Anyone who does is shitting themselves. That being said IT IS DAMN IMPORTANT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
October 21, 2009 4:19 PM
They're difficult to fathom, Jay, because you're not in those meetings.
But this will probably be taken as some slam against the Administration. They're selling us out! They don't really want the public option!!!
But hey, at least Rockefeller is named, instead of the typical "unnamed senior Democrats" baloney we've been handed for the last two weeks.
Somewhat ot, but does anyone else find the sudden love for Jay Rockefeller to be a bit amnesiac? FISA? Investigations into the prisons? What's that? Never mind?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
October 21, 2009 5:19 PM in reply to CT Voter
I commented on it when it started. Yesterday's craven bought and paid for sellout is today's hero. There's hope for Harry Reid yet.
But, yeah, biggest blackheart to hero character switch since "Deadwood" wrapped.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jim H
October 21, 2009 4:24 PM
If the Wyden Free Choice Amendment were in the bill, I might agree. Without at least one of the two, there is no competition. With both (PO and WFCA) you get damn good reform.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
October 21, 2009 4:35 PM in reply to Jim H
But does the American Public DEMAND Wyden Free Choice???
And that with or without Public Option (robust, anemic, triggered or opt out)?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 21, 2009 4:28 PM
It is reassuring to know we are not alone, in terms of our abilities to fathom.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
October 21, 2009 5:34 PM
Most important. Second important. Third. Whatever.
What some, like Rockefellar, seem not to understand is not everyone is ready to afford insurance on the own.
Many people in this country, and get ready for this shock, live paycheck to paycheck. Many of these people will not get subsidies, some will, and even with subsidies this could be a big burden. Not to mention the coverage they'll get for what they'll be forced to pay.
The goverment will be forcing people to buy a product from an industry, which is outside of anti-trust laws.
This industry demonstrated in the last couple of weeks how easy it will be for them to raise premiums. There is nothing to stop them. They'll have a captive market and, so far, very little is keeping them from raising premiums. A good PO would go a long way towards stopping, or atleast hampering this, and helping in affordability.
Also, people around here can't keep demonizing progressives, and then claiming Obama is one as well. It doesn't make sense.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
October 21, 2009 5:48 PM
The fundamental problem is the bill is underfunded. Unlike financial bailouts and war, we're doing it on the cheap. Plus, we force people to buy insurance but make no commitment that they'll ever be delivered healthcare.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
October 21, 2009 5:51 PM in reply to bluebell
we force people to buy insurance but make no commitment that they'll ever be delivered healthcare.
that's a good point
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
October 22, 2009 8:46 AM in reply to Indie Pro
Exactly. If they're going to do the mandates, they are policy and political poison unless accompanied by a real public option. Otherwise you're just handing people over bound and gagged to the insurance thieves. Voters punish politicians who do things like that to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Verified
October 22, 2009 12:48 AM
Why does the congress keep crying out for daddy to come and fix their messes? I salute the president for stating what he wants and letting the congress act like the adults they are supposed to be, expecting them to enact the legislation that poll after poll shows the people are demanding. We have become so addicted to tyrannical presidents who make endless deals and practice political retribution, that we forget the congress and the executive are equal branches of government. If I hear anyone mention LBJ one more time I think I'll spit. The big reason Medicare got through congress was because of overwhelming national grief over the death of JFK who wanted such legislation to succeed. Personally, I don't want a lot of games and conditions set for congressional votes. I want them to write and pass legislation for their constituents, their voters, not to please talking heads or lobbyists or the noisy fringe. No matter how much I would like it, Obama has little to gain by publicly beating his chest over a public option, so long as congress is not going to man up and pass it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bmull
October 24, 2009 11:18 AM
So wrong. The public option is cost control, and cost control is everything. Otherwise this is just a legal requirement to buy the overpriced private insurance product. It's a giant wealth transfer from the middle class to the health care industry, with a little money thrown to the government to ensure they will enforce the law. Disgusting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?