It's a poison pill -- let the Republicans swallow it, and lead the fight to opt out in as many states as they like.

Yes I am sure Texas with the highest rate of uninsured will opt out and screw a bunch of their poorest and sickest again. Why don't you fuckers just opt out of the USA and start your damned Christian Nation of Corporations. Please! Take the rest of the deep dumb south with you and then the REAL America can get on with the business of a more perfect union.

The opt-out is kind of genius policy-wise. It gives states whose lawmakers have concerns (however unfounded) about the public option a chance to say no. These lawmakers are almost undoubtedly Republicans, who if they control enough of the state's government to do so will choose to opt-out.

However, when the population sees that the public option is considerably less scary (indeed, even beneficial) and that the Republicans who made their states opt out were bold-faced lying to them, something amazing will happen: Democrats have a powerful argument for throwing the Republicans out of office on the state level in some of the reddest parts of the country.

Though the opt-out is not in the House bill, it is strongly in the strategic interests of the Democratic party to include it in the final bill. Not just because it will help the final bill get through the Senate; because it will ultimately bring the Democrats to power in places that haven't elected Democrats since the partisan realignment.

It may also help the final bill clear the house without the Stupak amendment. Instead of writing off the fiscally conservative dems and banking on the pro-life dems, an opt-out would help them get the votes necessary to pass the bill in the House too.

Opt out of a program that doesn't start until 2014, that doesn't have anyone signed up yet, that doesn't have any existing network of providers, that isn't assured a risk adjuster to make up for all the sick patients it will attract, that (like Medicare) isn't allowed to negotiate bulk purchases with drug makers...I don't see how it's going to work. End users are better off without the po and without a mandate. Keep insurance reform, and hold off on health care reform until later - as early as next year. Public education on this has just started. A mandate with spiraling rates sets up a Republican talking point.

Ihaven't seen this on tpm and I couldn't resist a visit to Huffpo just to see what they are saying and found this interview with Obama and Fox.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/19/fox-news-interview-with-
o_n_363266.html

Opt-out according to CBO will only attract 3-4 million Americans. That really isn't that many.

I think the budgetary considerations for states with "opt out" are huge. They're already going to have to deal with the expansion of Medicaid to those at 133% of poverty level. If those between 133% and 300% of poverty level can't find affordable private insurance in the exchanges, thus needing the "public option", but can't get it in their state, and can't move to a state that hasn't opted out, then those people are thrown back to the "emergency room" "compelled to treat" scenario or other publicly provided treatment options. These options all involve significant state and local government funding. The "public option" is an obvious money saver for state governments and their taxpayers. The state politics of opting out are dicey in so many ways for all the states that, the Perrys, Sanfords, and Jindals of the world will be riding another Populist tiger. A tiger that could eat them up.

A full .33 of consumers or is it really .013 of those that actually may qualify for the PO... I think there is a BIG difference!