The Power Of The Opt Out

Hunter has a good catch and may be the ultimate answer to Chris Bowers' question - here is Bill Nelson (the Florida Nelson) arguing for the trigger instead of the opt out:

Bowers thinks the discussion is about national level playing field public option versus national robust public option. It is not. Bill Nelson wants to thread his particular needle. Here is where the final bargaining starts. How we got here is interesting but not to the point. The Federalist Option is the political answer for getting a robust public option out of the Senate imo. Then we move to the House-Senate conference and see what happens.

Speaking for me only

< How Not To Refute A Claim | Monday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Yup (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:56:05 PM EST
    Federalist plan gets the most robust public option possible out of the Senate and into the conference. What happens to it there - who knows? But I'd rather go there with a strong plan that 50 senators support (because 10 of them plan on opting out) than a weak plan that 60 support.

    Careful they do not fob triggers on you (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:58:13 PM EST
    This is what Bowers is missing imo.

    Yep - I said above (none / 0) (#7)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 04:00:46 PM EST
    but it bears repeating - IMO, triggers = no public option. They might as well say they will think about a public option again in a few years.

    Always possible they are already planning (none / 0) (#8)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 04:03:49 PM EST
    to kill the public option in conference, and this is all irrelevant anyway. But advocating for the best plan available at every stage of the process is the best we can do.

    I didn't think (none / 0) (#1)
    by lilburro on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:54:56 PM EST
    of this inane argument.  I kind of thought the Federalist Public Option was fool-proof.  It clearly is not.

    AHIP (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:57:24 PM EST
    ain't going down without a fight.

    More important to say NO to triggers than NO to the Federalist Public Option.

    Bowers does not even know what the real threat is here.


    Absolutely (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:59:00 PM EST
    Triggers = no public option.

    I really thought (none / 0) (#9)
    by lilburro on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 04:14:43 PM EST
    triggers were dead.  Co-ops definitely seem dead.  The CBO hasn't even scored a trigger.  Maybe it has to do that to really kill off the beast.

    Interesting to compare though the reaction the Obama WH had to Snowe's trigger (as recounted here) to the reaction they've had to the Federalist Public Option...which is crickets.  The WH wants to make a show of considering the trigger but wants to act like the Federalist PO doesn't exist.  Why.

    I also think we are at a time in the process where Obama could step in more forcefully and say "look, there are a limited number of ideas on the table, these actually look good, these are inappropriate."  I think he should just say go with the CBO...and the robust public option.


    Inane is right - that's my Senator! (none / 0) (#4)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:57:50 PM EST
    Of course you didn't think of it - what sentient being would?

    Want an option? (none / 0) (#10)
    by SOS on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 05:37:56 PM EST
    Hell it's a start at least. At least someone is thinking outside the box.

    Qliance is a medical practice that specializes in comprehensive primary, preventive and wellness care. Qliance operates outside the insurance system. As a result, the practice does not bill insurance plans or receive payment from insurance carriers for the services provided.


    This is still rather (none / 0) (#11)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 05:45:16 PM EST
    young in its design. It's very localized, and, if I remember right, it doesn't have any access to testing or hospitalization.

    What I like so much about it is the way this area is taking matters into their own hands and creating solutions.