President Obama strongly supports Public Option in speech to Minneapolis
By John Amato Sunday Sep 13, 2009 10:00am
I know there's some debate over whether the president fully supports the public option and we know that the gang of six in the House of Lords is trying to derail it. Fox News is telling us that the public option is dead and the do-nothing Republicans are calling for it to be gone, but in a huge speech Saturday that took place to a fired-up campaign-style crowd in Minnesota, Obama was as strong on the public option as I've ever heard him.
President Obama: I think one of the options should be a public insurance option. (Loud cheers) Let me clear. It would only be an option, nobody would be forced to choose it. No one with insurance affected by it. But what it would do is provide more choice and more competition. It would keep pressure on private insurers to keep the policies affordable, to treat their customers better. I mean think about it. It's the same way the public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students. That doesn't inhibit private colleges and universities from thriving out there. The same should be true on the health care front. Minnesota I have said I'm open to different ideas on how to set this up we're going to set this up but I'm not going to back down on the basic principle that if Americans can't find affordable coverage we're going to provide you a choice.
Listen to the crowd cheer wildly over the idea of a public option. If he's so against the public option, then why did he stand as strong as he did in this speech? The bottom line is that if the president wants it, then he can get it done.
Although Obama said he favored a bipartisan plan, he cautioned that he would not negotiate with Republicans who displayed bad faith. That may have been a reference to Republican negotiators in the Senate.
The White House has made plain its annoyance with Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who was part of a bipartisan group negotiating a health care compromise. During that effort, Grassley put out a fundraising letter pledging to defeat "Obama-care." "I will not waste time," the president said, "with those who think it's just good politics to kill health care."
He also sought to imbue the debate with a sense of urgency.
Login or Register to post comments.
Which public option?
The crippled one proposed in the other night's speech, or a real one?
HR 676 is the minimum we should accept.
---
In other words, no one with private insurance would be able to drop that insurance and go to the 'public option'. The price of the insurance of the 'public option' will be kept at levels similar to private insurance.
This is more flim flam.
"In other words, no one with private insurance would be able to drop that insurance and go to the 'public option'. The price of the insurance of the 'public option' will be kept at levels similar to private insurance."
Alice... is this remark a theory or fact? Thanks
Obama in his address to Congress said that the public option would only be available to those who do not currently have insurance.
I consider it the point that progressives fight back. The Reagan Republiklan revolution aka known as the CRAP EATERS
"Citizens Resisting Anything Progressive, Especially Anything That Enables Real Security" (CRAP EATERS)
did what they did only because corporations funded them. Similarly if we go on a financial boycott against the funders of conservatives in both parties we can force congress to enact progressive legislation.
I have some health care petitions for HR676 single payer health care which appears better than the watered down public option.
GO TO HTTP://DEMOCRATZ.ORG to see petitions with immediate emailing to the people we petition. Get others to sign these petitions.
I guess I'll have to go watch it again. :-/
As far as the Presidents remark..."No one with insurance affected by it." I believe it was a a poor choice of words. If ya have a entity operating with a 4, 5, even 10% overhead, it will effect an entity operating at a 20 to 30% overhead.
As far as "no one with private insurance would be able to drop that insurance"... that does not sound like a public option to me.
Thanks for your time and for anyone else interested...
Pres. Obama's Health Care Speech to Joint-Session of Congress
[ http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/09/09/... ]
Amended: At about the 18-minute mark...
BO → "It's time to give every American the same opportunity we give ourselves"
Radicals are often loose with their facts! I guess we'll have to wait and see?
Until the speech earlier this week Obama was being criticized for the paucity of details of his own plan. The details are still not complete, but then his speech runs a few pages and HR 3200 runs 1018 pages.
HR 676 runs 27 pages. A few pages is not enough detail and 1018 pages is dangerous detail. 27 pages is exactly right.
Trudy Liebernam at Columbia Journalism review has done an extensive reporting series on health care 'reform'. She has an excellent understanding of the issues and the rhetoric.
This is after the speech earlier this week in which he used the same phrase that I quoted.
here
---
From Sept 3
Bill Boyarsky at Truthdig here
Wendell Potter is another with excellent insight.
Wall Street Banks hold these percentages of shares in Health Insurance giants and are increasing shares by the tens of millions
United 77.32%
WellPoint 79.04%
Aetna 79.45%
CIGNA Corp. 68.71%
Coventry Health 82.25%
Health Net Inc. 79.37%
Wall Street is the enemy.
You should probably focus on the saw(actions) & not the song(Obama's speeches). Obama & his Rove(Rahm) are corporate owned. If you wish to dismiss this as reality, so be it. You can then dismiss a whole lot of things(actions)...Yes vote on FISA...Secret deal with Big Pharma...Continued renditions...Escalation in Afghanistan(Noble cause?), Refusal to prosecute higher-ups for war crimes...Geither & Summers for economic policy(Krugman who?)... Maintaining framework for Imperial Presidency...Never even considering single payer...Lip service for public option...the list goes on. The bill Max Baucus, his Blue Dog & GOP buddies wrote in the Senate Fianance Committee is the bill wanted all along by the insurers/Obama. It rewards the private insurers & Big Pharma for their contributions(Legalized bribes). The final Fig Leaf Health Care Bill will fail because there will be no actual competition legislated in it against tne Vampires of Corporate Care.
.
It;s good to see someone has it all in perspective. Just follow the bouncing ball. It leads directly to big money and corporate America. Obama and Emanuel will put on one big last show to try and convince people they tried and then blame their failure on the Repugs. The public option is dead. Bring in the casket suckers. Obama is going down hard on this one because he conned us and he will be labeled a failure. Next Hillary and Buba get another shot.
...President Obama supports → The Employee Free Choice Act. Corporation(s) really like those Union(s) don't they... Deactivate snark now/
... that is all.
It just seems that the Dems are changing their "stand" on healthcare reform on an almost daily basis, and it is hard to keep up.
On the issue is because of the conservative Senate Democrats. We really don't need one repug vote in either the House or Senate. The conservative Senate Democrats are the ones blocking a real public health option.
Has been consistent all along if you listen to him. House and Senate dems are another story.
He said in his speech if someone has a better plan he will look at it. Co-ops and or ????? are just BS and not better plans.
Obama has said he would like single-payer but that is not possible now.
He seems to get what he wants . . . so far
The reason that single payer is not possible now is because Obama never even brought it up as a possibility.
He once said that single payer was what he wanted. But that was in 2003 - before he got tons of money from big Pharma and the insurance industry.
Weak.
During the Democratic primaries, the one real policy difference between Obama and Clinton were the idea of mandates and universal coverage. In reality, the conservative Democrats have also taken health industry money and they're the ones blocking real reform. Historically, Democrats have been trying to get this though since Truman. I will say this, there should not be any kind of mandate unless there's a public option available to everyone. Enforcing insurance mandates without a public option just results in a big windfall to the private insurance companies.
That would be a fail.
Nether McCain nor Obama were going to support real health care reform. Single payer(Medicare for all) would have reformed health care quickly. A robust public option would have placed a "Big Foot" in the door for an inevitable single payer system. There will be mandated insurance(Junk style)for all the uninsured with no public option worth a hoot. This is what Corporate America wanted & it's damn well what we'll get. Why would a Democratic president care what progressives & the majority of the American people want? Their bread is buttered by the monies of the rich & powerful...and that ain't us, baby.
on how to set up a Public Option?
Here's the quote from above by President Obama:
"I have said I'm open to different ideas on how to set this up."
Is he referring to co-ops which have already been deemed a failure? Is he referring to Olympia Snowe's "trigger"?
When do the fines/penalties for not having health insurance kick in? The day the bill is signed, this coming Jan. 1? In 2013? After the Public Option is set up? Will everyone will be able to sign up for the Public Option?
I believe him when he says he'll be signing "some form of health care reform" this fall. All I can say is that BEFORE he signs it he'd better be very clear with the American People EXACTLY what the details of the plan are.
As for me, if I will be facing a situation where I will be forced to pay for for-profit, substandard health insurance or face a hefty fine/penalty, then I will liquidate my savings, put my few things in storage and "travel" for a while.
I'd rather spend my last cent abroad where I know if I get sick I will be cared for, no questions asked than in a country that I believe doesn't care if I live or die. That only cares about how much money they can extract from me for their bloody capitalist agenda.
Abbybwood, you are correct. The answer is found in Moore's film, "Sicko". He asks a retired Parlimentarian why he thinks America is the only industrialized nation without national health care. The Brit replies that in those countries the government fears the people, while in America the people fear the government. Obama, the Blue Dogs & the entire GOP do not fear the American people's wrath for their continued screwing of them, because one corporate owned party or the other will always control the government. "We the People" have become the slaves of corporate plantation owners. Their government lackies do their bidding as senators, representatives & presidents. Is it any wonder that the U.S. Senator who most represents those "Slaves" is Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an INDEPENDENT.
The public option is worthless if all it does is take in the uninsurable. It won't help lower costs, because the insurance industry doesn't want those people. It won't give people like me an opportunity to get out of the grips of a monopoly which syphons 30 percent off the top as profit. And with a mandated enrollment, it will make the insurance industry so damned rich, we will never be able to accomplish reform. They already own half of Washington. Give them this, and they will own it all.
A public option is USELESS unless it is an available option for everyone. There must not be a limit on who can choose the public option! Don't let Obama pull a fast one on this!
A Public Option should include all! But if it is limited to a few support the bill. Once it is passed then the concept is a fact. It is a working idea. Then we can turn around and demand the option for everybody since it is there for a few. Get some form of a public option up and running. The private insurance companies will not let even a small group of people get the Public Option because soon everyone else will demand equal treatment for the benefit. Let it pass for a small group! then demand a fair shake!
When Medicare passed 40 years ago, people made the same argument. It is a "foot in the door." Oh, sure, give it to the elderly now, and then we can all call for universal health care. Look how well that worked out! If you can wait another 40 years, paying the detestible profits to the insurance industry, good for you! I can't afford it.
Matt Taibbi had an interesting article about the health reform, that peeked beneath the surface, and discussed aspects I wasn't previously hearing about.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29...
Among things I wasn't acquainted with was items like this:
“There's a flip side, though: If your employer offers you acceptable care and you reject it, you are barred from buying insurance in the insurance "exchange." In other words, you must take the insurance offered to you at work. And that might have made sense if, as decreed in the House version, employers actually had to offer good care. But in the Senate version passed by the HELP committee, there is no real requirement for employers to provide any kind of minimal level of care. On the contrary, employers who currently offer sub-par coverage will have their shitty plans protected by a grandfather clause. Which means …
"If you have coverage you like, you can keep it," says Sen. Sanders. "But if you have coverage you don't like, you gotta keep it."”
I read the same article and it pulls no punches. It describes in detail how we got screwed by the Repugs and the Dems, including Obama, Emanuel, Reid and my favorite, that two faced Pelosi. Read the article and weep.
Look behind the door that the toe is stuck in. You will see the wealth & power of Corporate America. They own the politcal system because our campaign laws(Written by the pawns of Congress)reward those who can buy our legislature(It ain't us folks). We peons get to vote for one of the wings of the American Corporate Party. Anything that appears in the final bill will be a fraud. Only single payer would have saved our health care system, and thus, our economy. In our rigged system it ain't gonna happen.
This is the first i'm hearing that any possible public option would be restricted to the uninsured.
It's hardly discriminatory. If you want to partake in the (possible) public option, cancel your insurance. Poof, you're uninsured and eligible. Not a big deal.
This has been part of the landscape for sometime.
They will not allow you access to the 'public option'.
The public option will be an option for all!
See my comment here
Follow the link to Trudy Lieberman at CJR here
This is what Obama said:
It (above) is the same in both speeches.
Trudy Lieberman goes on:
Read the rest of the article.
Lieberman has an excellent series on health care.
are a dreamer. Big Med and Big Pharma will be laughing all the way to the bank.
While Obama is becoming clearer and clearer that he “would like” a public option, he is also at the same time watering down and blurring the meaning of what the public option “might” or “could” be. This guy plays with words all the time. How can we have a president for 8 months and still not know for sure if he’s really on our side? I trust Barack Obama as much as I trust George W. Bush.
of course you have a right to your opinion but i must disagree. president obama's intention is to find the sweet spot regarding health care cost reform. to compare the trust of obama to the trusting of bush is ridiculous. obama is trying beyond the obvious at attempt to bring 'change" to washington. obama has/is attempting to work across the isle if you will. this is important strategy. if it's revealed the right will not work with the left the public will better accept the (d) lawmakers voting/passing this bill via a majority vs. super majority. a major concern in this country has been the division of people/parties since it has an impact of interfering with getting much done. obama is more of a grey area thinker with nuance. he will not speak in absolutes in order to keep the opposition guessing. he may be a good poker player.
"to compare the trust of obama to the trusting of bush is ridiculous"
But, you tell me then why so many members of Congress in Obama's own party don't know for sure or even trust where he stands on the public option?
I think President Obama has shown that he is a Corporate Democrat and a calculating liar. To blindly believe everything that comes out of his mouth, and that he is a Grand Master at political chess, and that he is 10 moves ahead of all mere mortals who try to understand his genius, is "ridiculous."
Dennis Kucinich on Health Care:
* I am the co-author and co-sponsor of HR 676, the Conyers/Kucinich bill, which will provide for true universal, single-payer health care. All residents of the United States will be fully covered for medical, dental, vision, mental health and long-term care. There will be no deductibles, no co-pays, and no insurance company employees whose job it is to deny you coverage so their company makes more money.
Barack Obama on Health Care:
* Every American has the right to affordable, comprehensive and portable health coverage. My plan will guarantee coverage through partnerships among employers, private health plans, the federal government and states.
Hillary Clinton on Health Care:
* I’m going to provide universal health care -- quality, affordable coverage for every American. We can do it by spending our health care dollars more wisely.
-----
Only one that proposed change I could believe in was Kucinich. Obama is giving me exactly what I expected. At a separate time, he said he would cover the uninsured and pay for it by cutting federal spending elsewhere. I never heard a pledge to get our costs, coverage and level of care on a parity with the other industrial countries, and certainly, once this "reform" is done, we'll remain the country with the most expensive health care system, by far. But, if he covers the uninsured, I think that would be an improvement.
You obviously have not been paying attention to all that Obama has and has not done. For instance what has he done since elected. Oh yeah, he has escalated war which he promised to end. The broken promises go on and on.
That vote, while still a senator, was a major warning bell to those of us who were not wearing rose-tinted glasses. Obama's "Let's not look in the rearview mirror" at war crimes was devastating to me. I smelled a corporate pawn who told progressives what they wanted to hear(Sound familiar?) while doing a lot of the crap Bush did. The enabler mantra of "Politics is the art of doing the possible" is one of my favorites ruses. A leader leads. If Obama had wanted even single payer, he could have used his bully pulpit to at least have gotten a robust public option ALL could have had as an option. He has chosen the murders of private health care over the interests of our nation.
If this is Obama being strong on the public option - it's not too impressive.
WASHINGTON, Sept 11, 2009 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Rising health care costs are the single biggest economic concern facing American businesses, according to a survey of business leaders released today by Business Forward.
Nearly 90% of those polled cite health care costs as a major concern, more than cite taxes, government regulation, labor costs or energy costs.
Without reform, 86% of those polled believe that health care costs will continue to rise in the next five years, and 55% believe it will go up "a lot." If costs continue to rise as expected, nearly 9 out of 10 business leaders expect to raise their employees' deductibles and copayments. Nearly 8 out of 10 expect to cut benefits. And nearly one in three expects to lay off employees.
"Year after year, business leaders have watched health care costs consume a larger part of their budgets and our economy, and they want action," said Business Forward Executive Director Jim Doyle. "This poll reminds us why it is so important for business leaders, trade groups, regulators, Congress and the President to stay at the negotiating table." The poll, conducted by Anzalone Liszt Research in advance of President Obama's address to Congress, showed that 57% of business leaders believe health care reform should be an important government policy. They support key elements of a reform plan, including insurance exchange (78% favorable), efficiency reforms and an oversight commission (71%), requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions (79%) and a public health option (51%).
"At a time when many Americans are worried about partisanship on both sides, this support is significant, because it comes from a group -- business leaders -- that is disproportionately Republican," said Doyle.
The survey also indicates that the surge in interest among business leaders during the 2008 campaigns is likely to continue -- and it could have a big impact on Washington. One in three business leaders became more involved in the 2008 campaign than in previous campaigns, and nearly nine out of ten of those leaders expect to be even more involved in future campaigns.
Business Forward is a new organization dedicated to building business support for policies that promote America's economic competitiveness, particularly those that relate to health care, energy, the environment and education. Business Forward briefs business leaders on key issues, holds conferences and press events, issues policy briefings and engages in other public advocacy initiatives.
Methodology. Anzalone Liszt Research conducted n=800 live telephone interviews with U.S. business leaders. Interviews were conducted between August 19 and September 1, 2009. Respondents were selected at random, and represent 9 major sectors of the U.S. economy, covering 81% of national payroll according to 2007 NAICS data (construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail trade, finance / insurance, healthcare / social assistance, professional / scientific / technical services, administrative support / waste management / remediation services, and accommodation / food services). Respondents are executive-level employees who are both knowledgeable about their company's healthcare costs, and involved in decision-making regarding their company's healthcare expenses. Respondents represent small (1-99 employees), medium (100-999) and large (1000+) firms. Expected margin of sampling error for these results is +/- 3.5% with a 95% confidence level.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32799150/site/14081545
Here is a good article that theorizes what Republicans are trying to do by tying health care reform to illegal immigration.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2888
All the President has to do is say "Medicare for everyone who wants it."
When the Blue Dogs threaten to vote no, tell them they'll face primaries and the President will personally endorse their opposition. Even if liberal Democrats can't win in many of the Blue Dog districts, the Blue Dogs will still lose their seats. It's better that the public sees the Blue Dogs as obstructionists and is given a refresher course on the incompetence and tyranny of Republicans.
If Obama was to drive the Blue Dogs out of office, and they were replaced by Republicans to the point where the Republicans regained the majority, they would then control the committee chairmanships, and could prevent legislation from reaching the floor. Sometimes, a half-loaf is better than none.
Is really hurting them. The primary threat wouldn't be seen as credible; rightly or wrongly, the Blue Dogs will not believe that the President will back challengers. GOP primary challengers are frequently backed by the "establishment" (not the party itself, but Club for Growth and other movement organizations). Democratic challengers are shut out; they self-finance, go to the netroots, or get nothing.
And the worst part is, even when someone is primaried out, they can still run, win, and face zero discipline from the caucus! (See Lieberman, Joe.) Given that Congressional leaders show no desire to discipline even those who break the most basic of party rules, the Blue Dogs know they have nothing to worry about.
Obama inherited this situation; he cannot change it overnight. I agree with the sentiment that those who support a public option should be putting pressure on the Blue Dogs, but I don't believe there's a practical way to accomplish that given the general lack of party discipline.
for the proposition that...
I really don't think this is true. The President has no effective leverage over Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad, Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln, et al. Primary them? They'll know it's an empty threat--the Democrats care more about nominal seats than about results, as they proven time and time again in the past. Strip them of their committee assignments? Possible, but a shift like that would take months, and the Senate leadership (i.e. Reid) wouldn't be on board anyway. Hurt their feelings with harsh language? Perhaps--but I doubt Obama would do it, and I doubt most of them would care.
Basically, if Sen. Nelson wants to get a public option, he can get it done. Obama can't. And that's very unfortunate.
I wonder why George W. Bush didn't understand that. Reagan certainly had no clue. After the GOP regains the House in 2010, how many days will pass before the letters start coming from the Democratic leadership? "Help us take back the House in 2012. As soon as we get all 535 congressional seats & presidency, you'll see come progressive legislation then. Oh yes, send money."
It's coming folks, every one should read Matt Taibbi's article linked above, it's an eye opener, another post above about the administration changing the meaning of the "public option" is correct too! They're playing progressives like dummies and most fall for it. It's Clinton all aover again, I said it before the election and regret that we're getting a triangulating centrist like I predicted. I also copied someone elses quote from today, when was the publis option going to be "kept at levels similar to private insurance". I thought it was to make insuarance companies more competitive. get ready for the bait and switch folks.
"In other words, no one with private insurance would be able to drop that insurance and go to the 'public option'. The price of the insurance of the 'public option' will be kept at levels similar to private insurance."
the article, but I linked it here myself already. Taibbi has good points.
I've been watching the language of the politicians. Obama was not using the language of the blue dogs. An affordable public option would not be the badly-crippled one. It was crippled to be both small and unaffordable. Sounds like he is willing to compromise with, how about small. IMHO, if it is affordable it may be the best (only?) chance for many of the currently uninsured with conditions that make private plans out of reach. So no stopping of cherry picking in this step, if so. But if the statistic that about half of all Americans (under 65) will go uninsured for at least part of a year sometime in the next ten years comes true, that won't be a small plan in 10 years.
Obama also mentioned subsidies which (iirc?) he did not mention in the Congress speech. I think he will need to find more funding that what he mentions too, for the final bill to meet his budget neutral promise.
Going to have to wait and see what happens to the actual text in the bills as they get rolled down to two, then one.
This dirt bag Obama works to stay in control of health debate: Obama kept up a steady weekend drumbeat of cheerleading for his health care plan in a campaign-style rally, on the radio and Internet, and on network television. He planned to continue the pace with more events designed to seize control of the health care debate following his address to Congress last week in which he urged Democrats and Republicans to come together.
“I will not accept the status quo. Not this time. Not now,” the president told an estimated 15,000 people during a packed rally Saturday in Minneapolis.
Meanwhile, protesters gathered Saturday in Washington to vent their fury at Obama and his vision for health care reform in a demonstration that drew thousands.
OK; I have a Question for you Mr. Obama! How in the cat hair are you going to pay for your vision for health care reform? WHEN!
The U.S. dollar is going the way of the Mexican peso: down!
More than $10 trillion in government spending is triggering a sudden and massive devaluation.
The TARP chief told Congress the federal bailout will now total over $23 trillion! That would be over $70,000 per person.
Tell us HOW ! Tell us HOW! You are out of yor mind if you think we are this STUPID!
You have some facts right some are wrong.
Neil Barofsky the Inspector General for TARP did use the number $23.7 Trillion to describe all of the plans proposed. But that includes plans which were not yet implemented or were discontinued. It is not an entirely useful number.
Still it is massive welfare for the Banksters.
Over ten trillion spent is probably correct, although the numbers are as clear as mud from the Fed. It is a travesty.
The 'protestors' in Washington came on 450 buses, that is less than 50 thousand people, it was a staged event by corporate interests.
HR 676, single payer would actually cost less than we spending now, all told. And it would provide better care.
But you are a troll so you don't care about those things.
Or that we should be concerned with the corporate capture of our government.
Consider these clips from the work of the late (d 1988) Australian sociologist Alex Carey
The first and so far only scientifically drawn study of the history of the corporate war on democracy.
CORPORATIONS AND PROPAGANDA
The Attack on Democracy
Part 1 - history through WWII
Part 2 - history after WWII
Mariah Gilardian at TUC radio (user supported) here, produced the clips.
70 big ones. Can I use my Visa?
is yesterday's man trying to look forward.
You know, I really wasted my vote in November. Obama or McCain(Bush)? If I had known the Obama promises were all lies, it would have been easier to pull the lever. I mean, the Iraq draw down is basically the same as the Bush plan, the Afghan strategy is MORE troops, and the beneficiaries of the economic fiasco are Wall Street Big Wigs, Insurance company executives, and the big bankers and brokerage houses. Immigration policies? Same as Bush. Gay marriage? Same as Bush.
He is a good speech giver but nothing else. The health care reform is being driven by the right wingers now. No public option, no way. All he wants is a way to say he passed something, no matter if it's good or bad. What a complete and total wimp. We've got another Carter.
Hillary had bigger balls than this guy. Whoopie! We elected the first black president, and he turns out to be an empty suit, kiss butt, cheer leader who has no stones.
Who knew?
Login or Register to post comments.