Harkin Open To Opt-Out Compromise, Predicts Public Option Will Pass

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Harkin Open To Opt-Out Compromise, Predicts Public Option Will Pass stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 10-16-09 12:50 PM   |   Updated: 10-16-09 02:31 PM

What's Your Reaction?
Harkin

One of the fiercest champions of the public option in Congress predicted on Friday that the Senate would pass health care legislation that included the much debated provision. But in a conference call with reporters, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) left open the possibility that reform would include (and he himself would support) an opt-out clause that allowed states to set up co-operatives in place of the public plan.

In a teleconference organized by Families USA, Harkin proclaimed -- before a question was ever asked -- that the final piece of health care legislation passed by the Senate "will have a public option."

"Four of the five [congressional] committee that reported all had a public option," he said. "All of the public polls show that a huge majority of the American people want a public option."

"There are 52 solid Democrats for a public option and only about five Democrats really kind of opposed to it," Harkin added. "One has to ask if the 52 should give into the five or if the five should come on board with the vast majority. I think the answer is clear."

But while stressing that the logic and numbers were there to get a public option through the Senate, the Iowa Democrat also conceded that he was open to finding a compromise if needed to break a Republican-led filibuster. Noting that there were three potential variations of the public plan that the Democratic Caucus was discussing, Harkin citing one, specifically, which he could support.

"That co-op idea seems to be persistent but I have not seen any data on how it can work at all," he said. "But if it was a choice, maybe I wouldn't have as much opposition if it was out there as a choice."

Asked to clarify later in the call, the senator said he was referring to a system in which Congress would create a robust, national public option while granting states the right to opt out of the system and set up a co-op instead. His preference he stressed, remains for a simple, national public plan. And when pressed on another compromise proposal -- setting up a national public plan that would only be triggered by economic conditions -- Harkin was much cooler to the idea.

"As the chairman of the HELP Committee, I'm advocating for what we have in our bill," he said. "I believe that we have done it right... I'm willing to listen to any good ideas and I will work closely with the finance committee, but frankly I think we got it right..."

Democratic leadership in the Senate is currently in the process of finding legislative language that could pacify the 52 caucus members who Harkin says are adamantly supportive of a public plan while gathering eight other votes to stave off a filibuster. As part of the process, they are also actively trying to keep the lone Republican supporter of reform -- Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine -- on board. Asked how important it was to have Snowe's support for the final measure, Harkin scoffed that good policy should not take a back seat to the veneer of bipartisanship.

"I have said all along, and I say as chairman of the committee now, that the most important thing is to get it right," he said. "It is to get the right kind of a bill, make it affordable put emphasis on prevention and wellness and get more competition.... That is the most important thing. It is not so important who you get on the bill. And I believe if we get it done right we will have the magical 60 votes for the bill."

One of the fiercest champions of the public option in Congress predicted on Friday that the Senate would pass health care legislation that included the much debated provision. But in a conference call...
One of the fiercest champions of the public option in Congress predicted on Friday that the Senate would pass health care legislation that included the much debated provision. But in a conference call...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
190
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
- ilse I'm a Fan of ilse 51 fans permalink

I'm sure the health insurance industry would love the "Opt Out" mixed in with the public option. That way they can bribe those who are in charge of choosing the "Opt Out". We have many blue dog democrats who are opposed to the public option because they are bought and paid for by the insurance company and I'm sure others would be more than happy to accept bribes to opt out. The "Opt Out" is a great way to destroy the Public Option. President Obama is hoping Baucus, Reid and Dodd do the right thing and give us an affordable robust public option. Waiting is agonizing but soon we will see whos side they are really on. President Obama has given us too much hope to let us down and anything less then a public option is not enough.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:53 PM on 10/18/2009
photo

EVERY plan outside of a strong, national, competitive public option is a gift to the insurance cartel. So when Pelosi, Harkin, Weiner etc. say 'We're going to have A (stress the word A ) public option'...­we have to ask...what kind ? Fact is, not all public options are alike...or good.

The opt-out idea is to benefit the cartel in states where they have monopolies as in Alabama where 1 insurer has 89% of the entire insurance market. Politicians in monopoly states will cowtow to the lobbyists (take bribes/campaign funds,etc.­) to opt-out of the national, robust/strong plan...swi­tching to a state co-op plan which would be pleasingly non-competitive to the cartel...w­ould be of no true benefit to residents of the state...ju­st back to status quo....whi­le the politicians will brag ' we worked hard and got you A public option !' It's absolutely pathetic the way our politicians are playing with the lives of Americans.

BEWARE of the politician­s/insuranc­e co's CON GAME !

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 PM on 10/18/2009
- jasper48 I'm a Fan of jasper48 25 fans permalink
photo

Here's a question, that come to my mind.

What if the opt-out option is accepted along side a "robust public option", as Harkin stated it;
Will the electorate in States like South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi, (who are still fighting the "Civil War" as "over23" said) be able to revolt in some manner to force their Neandertha­l/Evangeli­cal elected officials acquiesce???

Anybody got a thought on this?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 10/18/2009
- ilse I'm a Fan of ilse 51 fans permalink

An opt out will eventually just kill the public option. The health insurance industry will bribe those that have the power to "Opt Out" and bye bye public option.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 PM on 10/18/2009

I guess that would be a big FU to me since I live in SC. Our reps are still fighting the civil war. So I guess I can depend on them to do whats right for their constituents. right.....­........

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 10/17/2009

Which state can sell out its workers the most? Which can opt out of the most human rights and basic services?

A right-to-work, anti-union, no-minimum-wage, no-insurance state would be awesome for corporate America! Let's get rid of schools and firemen too! Just prisons and factories.

All the car companies and big manufacturers could move there, and all the slaughterhouses and other dirty work, too. Wal-Mart might even bring manufacturing back to America, if they could pay a buck an hour here instead of in China.

And if a worker can manage to work 65 hours a week, and not lose an arm, he can get by, if he can live on top ramen in the one-bedroom apartment he shares with 4 other guys. Yay!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:51 PM on 10/17/2009
- edwarvir I'm a Fan of edwarvir 36 fans permalink

Harkin is a joke. He told Ed Schultz that he
would not vote for any bill without a strong Public Option
clause in it. now he is backpeddling. What the heck
is so hard about standing up for what you really mean.
Which is it ?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:27 PM on 10/17/2009
- ChelseaC I'm a Fan of ChelseaC 155 fans permalink
photo

Sen. Harkin,
Well that's great--I guess--but I have a few pesky questions.­...
What IS the "public option?" I ask as it has no name or details.

Will it involved the insurance company in any way, shape or form (I hope not)
Will the "public option" be open to ALL who want in regardless of employee coverage/status?
Will the public option be completed government funded and paid for by taxes (I hope it is).
If we already have MEDICARE, why don't we just clean up and expand Medicare for all who want in and close down Mdecaid and SCHIP so we only have one public program instead of three--I mean why have three programs--that costs more--overhead, admin. costs ect. Also, that gives health care providers more red tape to deal with--sending claims to more than one government option.
Why have seperate health plans? Two for the poor SCHIP/Medicaid --and one for the elderly--M­edicare?It­'s wasteful not to mention humiliating for the poor.
Would it not make more sense to allow the young and health to pay into MEDICARE and be a part of it?

Yeah, "public option" sounds all fine and dandy, but I want DETAILS.
For example,HR-676 has details I can wrap my mind around.
The rest of 3200 just sounds like a boondoggle for the medical industrial complex.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:34 PM on 10/17/2009
- dawnec1957 I'm a Fan of dawnec1957 54 fans permalink
photo

FYI Canada started the Opt Out in their Providence­s.....And we all know how well that went...THE­Y ARE ALL NOW UNIVERSAL for Health Care....Op­t out sounds scary at first because my state more than like will opt out in the beginning (I;m in MO) But I truly believe that in the end, we will get Universal Care and for my Grand kids, that is what matters most to me .

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 10/17/2009
- Wallysmom I'm a Fan of Wallysmom 84 fans permalink
photo

The OPT-out provision will give the states the appearance of control, until the constituents start raising holy he// and start pressuring their Congressmen and State lawmakers. It is the best way to go. It puts pressure on the Republicans because they will have to stand before the people and tell them why the state next to them has public health care and they do not. The only down side is that people in "red" states, who are for the most part having the biggest issues in unemployment and lower employment income, will suffer....­suffer for an ideology.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 PM on 10/17/2009

Thank heavens for Senator Harkin. The Public Option is the cornerstone for Health Insurance reform. I would also add a Trigger: Even with the public option, if health insurance companies raised rates, denied insurance or refused to cover certain conditions, it would TRIGGER universal coverage through a single payer system! Now that would be real reform and real cost savings.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 10/17/2009
- ChelseaC I'm a Fan of ChelseaC 155 fans permalink
photo

A trigger in nonsence--who's going to "pull" it, when, who decides? The insurance company has had many years to run this country, it's about time they step aside and let the American people choose. Expand MEDICARE to ALL after the waste is cleaned up. I for one, am sick to near death of insurance companies.
I want MEDICARE as our public option, and I don't want to wait 34 years for it.

SAY NO TO TRIGGERS!
Only those supporting the insurance cartel would be pro-trigger! Yikes!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:44 PM on 10/17/2009

ChelseaC,

I'm sorry that you misread my comment. I would love to have the single payer system now. But Congress didn't have the balls to ask for it. So we are stuck with only the public option. I'm just stating that we also need to told the health insurance companies by their "short hairs". If they still try screwing the consumers, then the option becomes universal.

If I had my option, I would nationalize the health insurance companies and use the money that belongs to use to fund a universal, single payer system.

So BANG!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:55 AM on 10/21/2009

Letting states opt out would be a nightmare. Perhaps after a few years and a few election cycles the opt-out states would opt-in, but why let those people go for a few years without decent coverage?

Several dozen Republican congressmen voted for the Allard Amendment 3 years ago that would have let states 'opt out' of the federal minimum wage. Would that have been in the best interests of their constituents? or just the best interests of the corporate employers in their states?

If we let politicians decide to opt out for their people, or even if we let the people themselves vote --- after all the nonsense and propaganda they've been subjected to --- too many people will be deprived of care and coverage.

Do we want to see people sneaking over the border into a neighboring state, using fake ID, to get coverage their own state doesn't pay for?

Do we want to see corporate employers moving into the opt-out states to take advantage of cheap taxes and downtrodden workers? Should the "right to work" states become "right to no insurance" states too?

OPT-OUT is A TERRIBLE IDEA. MEDICARE FOR ALL. And ALL means ALL.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:10 PM on 10/17/2009

In 1/07, 28 U.S. senators voted “yes†on an amendment that would have scrapped the federal minimum wage. ....The Allard amendment was offered to the Senate bill (S. 2) to raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25 an hour.

Senator Kennedy commented: "members should understand the effect of the Allard amendment is: to repeal the minimum wage for any states among the 50 states."

Allard hid the repeal behind the “state flexibility†mask, claiming states should be allowed to set their own rates, without a federal floor, because of different costs of living and differing economies. The amendment would nullify the federal minimum wage standard in the 45 states that have their own minimum wage law, and allow the five states that don’t—Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee—to opt-out of any federal minimum wage increase by passing a minimum wage law providing at least $5.15 an hour.

Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thomas (R-WY)

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 10/17/2009
- jasper48 I'm a Fan of jasper48 25 fans permalink
photo

In 1964 when I first started working at 16, the minimum wage was $1.25. Adjusted for inflation, an inflation calculator http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgii) on the internet(s) shows that today it should be $8.59.

Had the minimum wage been hooked to the inflation rate, in the late 70's when it first began to go wild instead of having been a political and legislative football for all this time, maybe monies that have been streaming into corporate and business accounts in such copious amounts, would have benefited the working man a bit better.

What do you think?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 10/18/2009
- Bpeirce I'm a Fan of Bpeirce 16 fans permalink

NO OPT OUT, NO CO-OP, NO TRIGGER...­SOLID PUBLIC OPTION ONLY, ONLY, DECISIVELY
NO CAVEING!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 PM on 10/17/2009
- HLL I'm a Fan of HLL 76 fans permalink

Right on.

The Dems HAVE the votes. They just hafta flex their Democratic majority muscle already!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:05 PM on 10/17/2009
- gilbskg I'm a Fan of gilbskg 5 fans permalink

Sorry, we don't necessarily have the votes...ou­r party is not a unified voting block. Its the price we pay for backing conservative Democratic candidates in conservative states so they could get elected and swing us the "majority.­"

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:32 AM on 10/18/2009
- naschkatze I'm a Fan of naschkatze 86 fans permalink

Give that man a fan and a fave! We really should be saving SINGLE PAYER ONLY but we've compromised on that, and now, NO MORE COMPROMISES.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 PM on 10/17/2009
- pinhead71 I'm a Fan of pinhead71 5 fans permalink
photo

here s an easy way to find out what the bill's mean to you. get informed!!!
http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:30 PM on 10/17/2009
- Shouterguy I'm a Fan of Shouterguy 7 fans permalink
photo

At last...a voice of clarity in an idiotic debate.

Of course we need a public option, which TWO THIRDS of the American people support.

Move it along, Senate.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 PM on 10/17/2009
- Jerry York I'm a Fan of Jerry York 3 fans permalink
photo

I glad to hear this.

He has been wrong on everything he predicts.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:02 AM on 10/17/2009
- nomobull I'm a Fan of nomobull 45 fans permalink
photo

no to opt out.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:16 AM on 10/17/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect