White House Denies Pushing Trigger Option, Dem Groups Concur

The White House, along with several progressive groups and high-ranking Democrats, is pushing back against reports that the administration is advancing a compromise proposal in which a public option would only be triggered by certain economic conditions.

On Wednesday morning, liberal strategist Mike Lux, who advised the Obama administration during the transition, wrote that White House officials were pushing the "trigger" compromise as a politically palatable way of avoiding "a floor fight in the Senate."

Lux's story affirmed, in some respects, reporting that I did several months earlier, in which a high-ranking Democrat who works closely with the White House on health care matters told me that the president's team saw the "trigger" as the end-game compromise to the public option debate.

It makes sense. The lone Republican senator who remains in play for Democrats -- Maine's Olympia Snowe -- is a vocal advocate for the trigger option. And should the Senate be forced to reconcile a bill that includes a robust public plan for insurance coverage (such as the Senate HELP Committee bill) and one without such a provision (the current construct of the Finance Committee's legislation) a trigger could be the bridge between them.

And yet, groups and individuals who communicate regularly with the administration on health care matters insist that they have not been pushed recently to get comfortable with the trigger. And so did the White House itself.

"The story about us reaching out to groups is not accurate," an administration official told the Huffington Post.

"I don't buy that and I'm not much into speculation," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-Vt.). "It makes good media copy but no one knows what is going to happen... Even so, there has already been a major compromise in that we are not on verge of not doing a Medicare-for-all system, which is what many of us want."

"We have not gotten that call," said AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale. (The major union conglomerate deals with the administration regularly.) "And we will continue to do what we always do -- fight for what is best for working families -- and that includes having a robust public option that will break the stranglehold of the insurance companies and lower costs by making them compete."

Story continues below

advertisement

"We have not been contacted by the White House or told that they will buckle to the insurance industry and accept the trigger," said Charles Chamberlain, political director for Democracy for America, a progressive organization that has run health care-related ads against both Democrats and Republicans. "And if they did call and told us that, we would tell them it is unacceptable. It is the equivalent of having no public option at all. They probably know by now that's where we stand."

Several other individuals, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss conversations with White House officials, confirmed the above quotes. "The topic did not come up" during this week's call, said one member of a progressive working group that consults with the administration. Added another: "[The White House] did not go there."

The White House did not return requests for comment.

All of which is not to dismiss Lux's report. Another well-connected reform activist told the Huffington Post that the White House has discussed the trigger as a palatable political compromise in the past. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is rumored to favor the approach as a means of getting legislation passed, having said as much as far back as early July.

Meanwhile, Roger Hickey of the Campaign for America's Future told The Plum Line's Greg Sargent on Wednesday that "it appears to me that the White House is not trying for any other strategy accept to satisfy Snowe with her version of the trigger."

At this juncture, however, the administration does not appear to be directly pushing its progressive base to get on board with the trigger option. They might know it's a pill many in the party are unlikely to swallow.

"The trigger is a political compromise and not a policy compromise," said former DNC Chair Howard Dean. "It is destructive and it will set back the cause of reform for 20 years."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[ImissBush]

trigger??
roy rogers horse??
wat did evr do 2 NE!

plus hes stuffed

[layman]

Trigger my A$$ ! It's just a trick to fool the public and keep the public looting to continue. Again when the time to decide to trigger or not to trigger comes, then you have to go thru all these congressional crap and procedures, political haggling ending up doing nothing and the looting goes on and on until the river of human blood sucked dead dry by these industrial complex and congressional thugs.

[hopefulinpa]

It would take another 3 years to implement a public option if a trigger is used. Some plan that is. Forget the loser republicans and get this thing done right. Universal or a strong public option that anyone can get into if that is what they choose to do.

[Patriotallday]

How about an unemployment "trigger" that should it reach 10% then Obama would admit his stimulis spending is a failure and any unspent funds are returned to the Treasury? How about a Detroit "trigger" that says if Ford makes a profit next year and GM and Chrysler do not, then the 2 auto firms that received taxpayer baiout money, will be forced in to bankruptcy and have all assests sold off to repay the Treasury as much as is possible?

[TommyMcCarthy]

A HEALTH CARE STORY

I completely believe that President is not pushing the "trigger" option.........

I don't know that I'd say the President is "pushing" much except for EXPANDING the Afghan war.

I've dodged the flu, but I might be coming down with a potentially crippling case of "buyer's remorse"

It's not all the President's fault of course, this has been coming on since we all worked like dogs to elect Democratic majorities in both houses in 2006.

Remember how you felt that election might in '06 when you realized we had done it?
And Remember how you felt about this time of year in '07 when you realized it hadn't (and WOULDN'T) make a bit of difference?

Kind of having the same symptoms right now.
The worst part are these dreams in which Jimmy Swaggart sobbing "I have SINNED" morphs into Harry Reed sobbing "We JUST don't have the VOTES"....­..........­..........­..creepy huh?

Hope it doesn't kill me............or the country I love.

tm

[pyro]

"The trigger is a political compromise and not a policy compromise," said former DNC Chair Howard Dean. "It is destructive and it will set back the cause of reform for 20 years."

And that's all we need to know about it.

[ThanksMatt]

I understand the White House wants the Public Option but lets Congress prepare the floor for it - which is politically not a bad move. It allows to make visible how broad the acceptance and the will for the PO really is.

[Progress08]

Poor Ms. Snowe is getting bullied by her own party. I can't imagine what it must be like for her to endure the insulting degrading threats of her own party. She should just flip to Democrat. Hell, she'll still win in Maine and if acts like a progressive she'll have even more support.

[truthartbeauty]

Can the bar be set any lower? THIS ? is what they call a hero? pathetic. There is more noblilty in my cat than this btch has.

[hallowellboy]

Trigger option is no option at all. Do not rely on Olympia Snowe to come around or buy her off with the trigger option. She receives large campaign contributions from the insurance industry. Snowe will stiff America like she stiffs the people of Maine.

[hopefulinpa]

The Trigger is a cop out! Do not buy it! After a trigger has been 'triggered' it would take another 3 years to implement a true public option all the while the public is getting even more ripped off by the insurance companies.

[PhilipTaylor]

“Healthy Americans Act” S 334 a bipartisan bill by Senators Wyden(D) and Bennett:

CBO + Joint Committee on Taxation = Budgetary effects are neutral by 2014

S 344 = Internet Exchange offering universal coverage customized by state (zip):

All Americans except those in Medicare and military can go to the Internet to enroll in any of 1,300 company plans that meet your states legal requirements. Sorted by Annual Cost or other Criteria using buttons!

Employer-based coverage would likely be reduced over time as most people will want their own custom Plan for their family.

Premium subsidies would be provided based on income to help make affordable for low- and moderate-income families.

Benefits:

1. Nearly 99% of Americans covered
2. Removes unregulated individual market as Exchange is Fully Regulated
3. All people are covered regardless of health
4. Premiums for sicker individuals would not be charged higher premiums than healthy
5. Set standards for the health insurance plans offered through the Exchange
6. Requiring plans to be actuarially equivalent initially to current Blue Cross available to federal employees.
7. Limits premiums income basis to ensure affordability for low- & moderate-income users
8. Families can retain health insurance plan they are enrolled an like
9. Can Change Plan id Insurer does not meet your Needs
10. Reduces health care costs using financial incentives encouraging cost-effective plans

[EbonBear]

The "trigger" is a political con-game to ensure that the public option never happens.

[TomTheAlmostUgly]

I have a great idea: Let's make paying taxes be subject to a "trigger." I must pay taxes on April 15th only if I'm not late on my mortgage payment, _and_ have X dollars in the bank, _and_ don't have more than Y dollars in credit-card debt.

Of course, what might happen: Nobody makes a mortgage payment between March 15th and April 15th, then on April 16th, they send in their mortgage payments; and everyone goes on a cash and credit-card spending spree on April 14th.

Wouldn't that be great? If we must get public health insurance only if "certain conditions are met," then the federal government should get tax revenue only if "certain conditions are met." After all, if it's good for them, it's good for us, right?

[Marcospinelli]

We need affordable quality medical care, and we have the equivalent of the m0b/Black Hand/M@fI@ (Big Insurance) standing between us and healthcare providers. Private insurance adds nothing to the healthcare delivery system; it just takes a cut. Up to 33%.

When government does the job of administration, it does it for 3%.

In the USA of just a couple of decades ago, the DoJ would be prosecuting the private insurance industry and dismantling them. Instead, we now have Republicans, a DLC-controlled Democratic Party and the president all protecting the private insurance industry, while Americans are in crisis, going bankrupt and dying.

We know how to solve this problem, and it doesn't take years, and it doesn't take "innovation" -- It takes lowering the age for Medicare. Even then it wouldn't put the private insurance industry out of business. There would still be private insurance, for things like private hospital rooms and cosmetic surgery. But there would be medical care for everyone, across the entire country.