Column:
Public option is necessary for reform
Published Oct. 20, 2009
Speaking Thursday in Louisiana, President Barack Obama promised a health care bill by the end of the year. This month, it is expected a health care bill will reach the legislative floor for debate. Several aspects of the bill have been added and taken away multiple times. On Sunday, Obama's aides said he would not require a public option in a health care bill in order for him to sign it, even though it's still his preference.
A majority in the Senate opposes a public option as well. Coupled with the president's decision, this means the public option part of the health care reform bill may well be dead. This is outrageous.
Without a public option, citizens will most likely be left with a bill requiring them to purchase health insurance with no realistic way to make sure that insurance stays affordable.
All the talk about fines for those who don't purchase insurance was only useful if the public option existed. I believe a public option is the fairest way for the government to make sure insurance companies keep their coverage affordable.
A public option allows those who want "Cadillac" plans from their insurers to continue getting the coverage they want from their insurer, and maybe even for a better price. Without a public option, the government will have to directly interfere within private businesses to make sure that they keep coverage affordable. To me, this seems more socialistic than just having a government-subsidized alternative to private insurance.
Obama is probably trying to foster bipartisan ownership of this bill by taking the public option requirement off the table. He is going to cause much more bitter debate within the legislative houses, because the Democrats that demand the option now have to fight without the endorsement of the president. Republicans might feel more inclined to contribute to and pass the health care bill, but they will only do so if the public option stays dead.
The really dumb part is Obama still thinks the public option is the best way to achieve the goals of this health care bill. This will not make things easier.
At least Chris Dodd is still hopeful. He says he "hasn't given up" on the public option, and when the bill reaches the Senate, he will work with other Democratic leaders to include it. He believes when the moment arrives, those who are sitting on the fence will be swayed.
I think this Democrat has got his head on straight. I believe the Republican threat of filibustering a public option bill is pretty empty. So many people outside Washington are expecting a realistic reform in health care. When the vote finally comes, I don't think Republicans will be able to drag the process out any longer and still be able to face their constituents. Hopefully, the Democrats in the legislature can just stick to their guns a little longer, even if Obama has left them to fight alone.





4:08 a.m., Oct. 20, 2009
BackyardPit said:
Public Option Is Necessary For Reform Mr. President, if there is no Public Option in the health care bill you sign it is not health care reform. It is you selling the American people out to the insurance companies. This is outrageous. Democrats in the legislature can just stick to their guns a little longer, even if Obama has left them to fight alone. The really dumb part is Obama still thinks the public option is the best way to achieve the goals of this health care bill. Without a public option, citizens will most likely be left with a bill requiring them to purchase health insurance with no realistic way to make sure that insurance stays affordable.