TPMDC
Can States Opt Out Of The Public Option Immediately?
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
Share
Send to a friend!
When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid first announced that he'd chosen to include a public option with an opt-out provision in his health care bill, he suggested that states would be required to offer the government insurance plan for a year before opting out. Well, it appears as if he's dropped that requirement.
In general, the bill reads, "A State may elect to prohibit Exchanges in such State from offering a community health insurance option if such State enacts a law to provide for such prohibition." Separately, if a state opts out, they can also opt back in, if they repeal the law they used to opt out. But one of the key selling points of the opt out provision to liberals is that states wouldn't be able to opt out until after the public option became somewhat entrenched. We're looking for more guidance on this, but it seems as if that entrenchment period is gone.
Comments (14) | 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.
GenePoole
November 19, 2009 9:52 AM
How about a 'trigger' for the opt-out? Let's say that a state has to wait 12 years (the length of time the pharmaceutical lobby wants patent protection for) before they could consider opting out. Sounds fair to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chimpale
November 19, 2009 9:59 AM
I'll be looking through the bill to find this, but in the meantime, does anyone know what it will take for a state to opt out? Is it the legislature, the governor, a referendum, or what?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 19, 2009 10:14 AM in reply to chimpale
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
a SC mom
November 19, 2009 11:45 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
bill introduced in South Carolina Nov 17, 2009
H 4171
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/cgi-bin/web_bh10.exe?bill1=4171&session=118
i really hope the Dem candidates can run with this info.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
November 19, 2009 10:08 AM
It WILL be put back in in conference. NO WAY Libs sign on to this shit unless it is in place for a few years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
November 19, 2009 10:11 AM
The number of states that opt out will be the same as the number of states that refused the stimulus money. In the unlikely event that a state does opt out, the voters in that state will soon force the state to opt back in.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 19, 2009 10:15 AM
Huh? When was that and to what liberals? I don't remember that ever being discussed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frog Leg
November 19, 2009 10:19 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I'm with NCSteve here. I don't remember this ever being mentioned. Maybe Brian is privy to some discussions that are not public?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Xantar
November 19, 2009 10:36 AM in reply to Frog Leg
No, I just think Brian is really concerned.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Miles
November 19, 2009 11:40 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Reid, in his rollout, was asked "when states could opt out", to which he replied "2014". It was a vague question with a very vague answer, but Brian interpreted it as AFTER 2014. I interpreted it as UNTIL 2014.
UNTIL 2014 is much better, because participation is going to be popular almost everywhere. So, in 2010 and 2012, state-level GOP will be required to run against a popular initiative.
Also, the only states that opt out will be ones that have GOP House, Senate, Governor, and Supreme Courts. If their only platform is "I won't sell you cheaper insurance" they'll lose at least one of those--at which point they'll be unable to enact the opt-out.
The opt-out, like the co-op, is a political compromise rather than a policy one; however, it's a compromise that helps progressives at the electoral expense of moderates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
November 19, 2009 11:26 AM
Am I the only one anticipating an exodus of unemployed and underclass, from the states where some grandstanding idiot Republican governor triggers such an "opt-out"?
I can't yet figure out the political ramifications of such a state's actually doing so. On first blush, it seems they'd be left with more patrician, establishment conservative populations. But, electorally-speaking, I'm not sure how that would work out for them.
(Shorter deep thought, here: who would be left, in Alabama?)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Xantar
November 19, 2009 11:40 AM in reply to Barry Champlain
Exiles from Mississippi?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 19, 2009 11:41 AM in reply to Barry Champlain
Same people who are there now. The ones who are too poor to leave. (Hey, I'm a southerner so I get to talk smack about 'em.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
November 19, 2009 12:38 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Not a "Southerner" (thank God) but been living in L.A. (lower Alabama) for the past 3 years. There are so many wonderful, kind, poor people here that are going to get screwed with this opt-out opt-in bullshit. It's really tragic what this country does to the poor and uneducated. This is all such a sham.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?