Key Centrists Rally Around Conrad's Co-op Plan For Health Care (VIDEO)

Two centrist Senators who will play vital roles in the health care debate, said on Sunday that they were intrigued by the idea of structuring co-operatives for health care coverage in place of a public option favored by most progressives.

Sens. Susan Collins and Ben Nelson lauded the proposal of their co-panelist, Sen. Kent Conrad, during an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union." In the process the Maine Republican and Nebraska Democrat left the obvious impression that if the Senate were to introduce a health care reform proposal structured around co-ops and not a publicly run health care option, the legislation would garner the 60-votes potentially needed for passage.

"It is an intriguing idea," said Collins. "I commend Senator Conrad for coming up with this idea. It is far preferable to the government run plan that has been discussed by the administration. This is a possible compromise. I need to know more details. We need to know how it would work. But it is certainly better than a Washington-run plan."

Added Nelson: "Senator Conrad's onto something here. This can be an additional method for competition."

To this point, both Collins and Nelson have hinted that they would not support a public option for health coverage - citing the argument that it could drive private insurers out of the market by creating unfair competition. Their respective votes could play key roles should the Senate consider the matter with a filibuster threshold. Nelson, however, has indicated he would vote for cloture on a public option even if he ultimately opposed the bill.

Conrad's proposal is designed as a third-way of sorts between a public option and the status quo. Co-ops would be membership-owned and operated, run as non-profit organizations, adhere to state laws for health care coverage, and provide health care insurance for individuals and micro-business

Reaction to Conrad's co-op idea has been mixed, with a bit of trepidation among progressives who are skeptical it would bring about systemic change to the health care industry and generally want to see more details, including what enforcement mechanisms and eligibility requirements might look like. On Sunday, the North Dakota Democrat didn't get too deep into the micro-analysis, choosing instead to tout his plan's most significant attribute. He has the votes, he said, and the public plan doesn't.

"The problem is votes, at the end of the day, nothing advances unless you get 60 votes in the United States Senate," he said. "I know there are some who say we can do this through reconciliation... I think on exploration people find that really does not work... So I think you're in a 60-vote environment, and that means you have to attract some Republicans as well as holding virtual all the Democrats together. That, I don't believe, is possible with the pure public option. I don't think the votes are there."

Comments

[Steve Magruder]

Key centrists may "rally" around this, but you can't pass a package with no progressives and almost no Republicans, most of whom don't want to vote for any reform.

[marinade]

"This really isn't, to me, a matter of right or wrong," Conrad said. "This is a matter of: Where are the votes in the United States Senate?"

Oh, good. Right and wrong don't matter....­....

[RepugsOut08]

Pathetic, isn't it?

[Ryoki]

Co-op=Cop out
Not what we want, not what we need. Single payer only.

[petrosbasileus]

You're never getting single-payer health care. Never. The votes are not there. Of course, Obama's complete lack of involvement in pushing for single-payer and his little tour promoting a nonexistent plan... isn't really helping the cause. H.R. 676.

[nomobull]

you will if we keep reminding these idiots that they work for us .

[Steve Magruder]

Who would run the co-ops and who would prevent them from being run greedily by management that wants to overpay its management and have extravagant overhead instead of paying out on claims?

Also, will they have sliding-scale affordability for the insurance plans?

[ProAmericanLobbyist]

We the People need to PLAN to remake Congress in the 2010 Primary Election.

We did it in 2006 and 2008 and We can Do it in 2010!

Medicare for All or Congress will fall!

[jonbw]

Top targets, Specter, Dodd, Bennet, Reid if the public plan is killed.

There are many open seats. Its time to get behind several progressive candidates in Paul Hodes in NH, Jennifer Brunner in Ohio support the public option. Not sure about the candidates for Missouri and Kentucky

[SpectCon]

It won't matter if there is no public option, the Dems will all be voted out.

They won't be voted-out becuase it's not good enough, but because, without a public option, there are no immediate price reductions and there is an immediate mandate to get covered.

...And they want to tax benefits. This is nuts.

[RepugsOut08]

HOORAH! I'm with you on that!!!
Other than kickbacks and corporate donations, votes are the only things they understand. Let's try to get that message across NOW when it really counts.
If we wait until they screw us on health care, it will be too late. We might get the satisfaction of voting them out, but we'll still be screwed, and they'll still have THEIR lifetime government health care.

[mrh3]

Guess who is who.- A. A fence sitter -B. A wolf in sheep's clothing- C. A saboteur.

[Clevella]

From the article: "To this point, both Collins and Nelson have hinted that they would not support a public option for health coverage - citing the argument that it could drive private insurers out of the market by creating unfair competitio­n."

Driving private insures out of MEDICINE is exactly what I want to see. Insurance companies are in business for one reason, and it is not to make people healthy. It is to make money. To make money they inflated the cost of everything.
Let doctors heal, and get 'for profit' insurance companies out of medicine, or set up NON PROFITS to provide health care. Insurance has nothing to do with medicine, and everything to do with money.

[speedingpullet]

Co-signed.

[Prakosh]

If they approve this co-op option they will be right back in 12-15 years just like they were after the Clinton great idea which was HMOs. This is not change this is just another name for more of the same.

[mrh3]

Co-ops already exist. This is B.S.

[KrugnacTheMagnificent]

ROFL, the REPUBLICANS floated a plan for state centralized co-ops weeks before the Dems said a word about it.

The Dems are rolling over once again, and a few centrist Republicans are trying to help them save face by acting like the Dems thought the whole thing up. Priceless!

[mrh3]

If they stick us with this turkey I'll swear off voting for democrats and just retire from civic involvement.

[Anthro]

I'm with you--I had such high hopes for Obama, but it's all sinking like the Titanic before my eyes.

[ReedYoung]

Already? Jesus, you could take eight years of Cheney-Bush, Inc., but Obama's inability to establish all the right policies within the first year of his first term is too much for you to handle?

[Coinyer101]

'YES WE ........co­uld have.....,­,,,'

[Coinyer101]

There will be he// to pay if President Obama signs that kinda bill. But, then, as a centrist, himself,it wouldn't surprise me if he did.

[dmann32]

NO CO-OP PLANNN!!!!! Obama that is a bloody cop out! NOTHING will change! They will not be forced to change their coverage procedures and/or lower their costs!! The optics and technicality of it seems like a 'major piece of legislation' but it WILL NOT CHANGE THE REALITY FOR MILLIONS OF US OUT THERE!!!! Bill Maher is RIGHT!! Stand up for principle: VITO THIS WHEN AND IF THIS CO-OP BS COME ACROSS YOUR DESK!!!!!

[Coinyer101]

There you go 'centrists'! there's yer big change! whatever..­...,