White House: "Absolutely False" That Reid And Obama Aren't On Same Page

The White House issued a statement Sunday evening reaffirming its commitment to a public option for insurance coverage and called reports that the president and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid were pursuing different strategies, "absolutely false."

In a three-paragraph post on the White House's blog, Deputy Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer offered, what he called, a "Rumor Check" of those recent reports.

"In his September 9th address to Congress, President Obama made clear that he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition," Pfeiffer wrote. "That continues to be the President's position."

"Senator Reid and his leadership team are now working to get the most effective bill possible approved by the Senate," he added. "President Obama completely supports their efforts and has full confidence they will succeed and continue the unprecedented progress that is being made in both the House and Senate."

Coming amidst reports (including one on the Huffington Post) that Reid has been left alone to pursue health care legislation that includes a public option with a clause allowing states to opt-out, Pfeifer's post is not some insignificant bit of push back. The White House denied similar stories late last week. But as one source points out, this is, perhaps, the most direct pledge that the administration has made to work in tandem with Reid.

Still, sources on the Hill and off remain skeptical. One Democratic aide quoted in the Huffington Post's report on Saturday night, restated (after Pfeiffer's blog entry was published) that the president and his team "want to continue to work" with Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) on a public option that could be "triggered" into existence - leaving Reid to push the opt-out without the White House's cover.

"[The president] is not working against us- he just continues to be non-committal," the aide said.

The White House has stressed, repeatedly, that the president favors the public option. It was, as one administration aide put it, a major part of his presidential campaign. Pfeiffer's blog entry, at the very least, hints that the administration is going to be more aggressive in its engagement on the issue.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[treadway123]

03:08 PM on 10/27/2009

HP needs to check it's facts or they will end up like Fox news.

[Malkin72]

08:05 AM on 10/27/2009

OK....

For all of those blind sheep Obama loyalists....you see, you were going to sit quietly and ALLOW Rahm to kill the public option. You are NOT helping progressives causes...nor are you helping Obama, by being so blindly loyal to him.

For all of those people who REFUSED to believe anonymous sources, here you go....from the mouth of a Congresswoman. Obama has been carrying the insurance companies water doing Rahm's bidding and not ours....

BE LOUD PROGRESSIVES.

Reid’s Opt-Out: The Devil is In the Details
By: Jane Hamsher Monday October 26, 2009 2:54 pm

In his presser, Harry Reid said very little about what kind of an “opt-out” he’ll put in the final bill.

The good news: Pressure on Reid from progressives when his poll numbers are flagging made him defy the White House. More importantly, he ratted them out to the press. Rahm thought he could continue to push for triggers in the background and satisfy the base by mouthing gibberish about “the President supports a public option” until it was too late. It didn’t work out so well.

BTW- I was right about Harry Reid being the leaker. ALWAYS look to see who gains from a leak...99% of the time there is your leaker.

[swulsin]

12:43 AM on 10/27/2009

a double negative never gives a very emphatic positive impression, even if the qualifying word is 'absolutely.' I absolutely don't think it's false that Obama absolutely doesn't not want the public option but isn't not pussyfooting around a bit not to avoid not stepping on health industry toes.

[max hp]

10:24 PM on 10/26/2009

If the WH is on the same page as Reid, it is doing a heck of a job fooling EVERYBODY.

WHERE IS THE LEADERSHIP?

[Benton]

03:53 PM on 10/27/2009

Stop aping what you hear others say. You have no idea what is going on behind closed doors. Name one person who has been out humping more for a Public Option then Obama?

[humpfree]

06:23 PM on 10/26/2009

I see nothing in the Huffington on today's AP article concerning health insurance profits. I wonder why? Seems pertinent to me.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iorq8FSpX_4LX_UG_xHQIjJY3SvgD9BIQPN01

[maeme]

05:10 PM on 10/26/2009

I just don't believe the White House or Obama. He has not demonstrated any leadership on healthcare. I am less than impressed.

[MorningJoeMikaIsMarried]

09:54 PM on 10/26/2009

Get over it....... he at least made her Secretary of State

[Elaine Spencer]

05:01 PM on 10/26/2009

When does the "opt-out" provision take effect?
I live in Harris County, Texas. We need to vote out our current Republican officials.
Gov. Rick Perry and Senators Cornyn and Hutchison have sold out to special interests.
The Republican party is the party of "No!" - no compassion, no ethics, and no integrity.
Their mantra is "The public be damned."
Not everyone in Texas shares the governor's tragic red-neck mentality of threatening secession and enjoying executions. What an embarrassment!
President Obama won Harris County, [Houston] Texas in the Presidential election.

[pwg357]

02:16 PM on 10/26/2009

Since Mr. Stein's article here seems to function as a counterbalance to the article "Leaderless" which I am sure many of you read I would like to point out the neccessity of articles like "Leaderless'.

First of all was "Leaderless" unfair? Perhaps... but so what? Unfair or not it appears to have forced Obama's hand a bit on (re)clarifying his stance on the opt-out issue. Obama himself said he wants to be challenged and I believe all politicians respond primarily to political pressure and money. Well the rich CEO's and their lobbyists have all the money. All we the people have is ability to pour relentless pressure on our elected representatives to enact our agenda, if we care enough to stay engaged in the process of legislation, or said representatives will suffer to lose their positions.

In the end it is up to us to ensure we get the health care reform we want through trenchant criticism. And if some of that criticism is "unfair"? Once again... so what?

[Wisconsin Dave]

02:31 PM on 10/26/2009

My thought is, a majority of middle-management are not to happy
with the multinational rich shipping most of our wealth out of the
country.

And if this is true, then unless government ends the gross corruption
in capitalist medicine we most likely are in store for a mass rebellion.

[wdw505]

06:12 PM on 10/26/2009

do you feel rebellious.....laughing

[petalsoft]

05:17 PM on 10/26/2009

How does it force Obama's hand? The polls have been out for months and if that didn't do it...why would it now? None of what anyone writing makes sense as it boils down to anything but political theater. I'm sure the WH was weary of the votes they had and were looking at alternatives...nothing as dramatic as what has been stated or posted by the so called MSM.

[Wisconsin Dave]

02:04 PM on 10/26/2009

BUTCHER MEDICINE ---- SAVE US FROM DOCTORS

(1) Virtually all doctors in the U.S. retire millionaires.

(2) All doctors get a 40% referral fee, a full 40% kick-back of all
money paid to any specialist they recommend.

(3) Thanks to the processed food industry, the average American
diet is 50% fats. This the major cause of illness, and yet no doctor
is required to take one course in nutrition, and most all doctors say
that diet has little or no effect on poor health.

(4) To make a profit off the misery of the sĭck, surely this would corrupt
the morals of the most honest doctor on earth.

[KarateKid]

02:08 PM on 10/26/2009

woowoo spotted.

[Wisconsin Dave]

02:11 PM on 10/26/2009

"Babylon, land of deepest shadow and deep darkness,
where even light is like darkness."

[kesmarn]

03:07 PM on 10/26/2009

(1) All insurance execs in the US retire millionaires.

(2) Just plain false.

(3) No one is being force fed fats and most all doctors say that poor diet DOES cause poor health.
HOWEVER--and this is important for diet fanatics--not all illness is caused by diet.

(4) To make a profit off the misery of the sick is the goal of the insurance industry. Doctors have nothing to gain by failing to help people get well.

[KarateKid]

01:51 PM on 10/26/2009

I don't know how y'all feel about this, but if you have access to employer health care plan(s), you could be ineligible for the public option. Now, to me, that would stink to high heavens, and not be an option at all, just another plan. And THAT would _piss me off.

[dfranz]

03:37 PM on 10/26/2009

Considering employer provided health insurance has been going up about 20% per year, I don't relly think this will be a problem unless your employer is self insured. My employer has already told us we're on our own and is now giving us an allowance to buy our own insurance. I would assume others are going to be doing the same.

[KarateKid]

03:54 PM on 10/26/2009

My owner had been subsidizing the cost increase, about 22% per year, for three years when he suddenly told us he couldn't afford it any longer and passed it all on to us. There are only around 50 employees, 27 don't take it because they can't afford it. I'd like nothing better than for him to say, no more, but not before all this passes.

Now, I could understand the increases if a bunch of us were hospitalized, but no one, not one of us used the hospital and all we used it for was the annual physical and doctor's visits for colds. This is another case of insurance carrier abuse.

[Haitians4Obama]

12:55 PM on 10/26/2009

It's funny (and a shame) how the WH had to come out on a Sunday night to denounce out of all....HP!! LOL.

HP, I have to say...that article "LEADERLESS" was a true "Faux News Moment". Even if the content was true (which was not founded on any proof), what was your point of posting in on the main page and the Politics page?

SMH

[psychodog]

01:31 PM on 10/26/2009

Actually, Sen. Rockefeller came out on Friday slamming the trigger option when it was rumored that the White House was leaning that way... and what's the date on the HP story? 2 days later?

I'm sure they wished this blog had that type of importance, but I'm pretty sure that it was directed at those in power.

[Benton]

03:57 PM on 10/27/2009

Obama did not event the notion of a trigger. A trigger was argued for by some in the Senate and was being considered as part of the mix. Of course Rockefeller would be arguing against it given the argument for it was being made by some Senators. Its funny how all of a sudden Obama has not done this or that with respect to the public option when there would not even be a discussion about a public option but for him. Throughout the year the Senate and at times the house got cold feet on a public option the only person who has been consistent is Obama.

[KarateKid]

01:53 PM on 10/26/2009

It caused many of us to question the motive behind it.

[CalousteGulbenkian]

12:54 PM on 10/26/2009

Hah!

Now I understand how Obama got so many "Present" votes. He likes to sit on the fence until its clear that there will be no major fallout.

[gladys46]

12:58 PM on 10/26/2009

Clearly you have no idea what a "present vote" means in ILL politics! So, just look away!!!

If you or anyone else feels that a "trigger" for insurance cos. is NOT beneficial to anybody ... tell your congressional members :

http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/notriggers

[KarateKid]

03:55 PM on 10/26/2009

Clotaire, baby, how's it going. What is this, your 25th sock?

[neesy08]

12:54 PM on 10/26/2009

i didn't believe it when i read it. it soundedd like something the gop would say

[Rhiana]

12:27 PM on 10/26/2009

I think I am getting an ulcer from this. Thankfully I have insurance that will supposedly cover treatment.

I have emailed my senators and congressman, I have signed every on-line petition in support of the public option, I stood outside town hall meetings in support of the public option. I sent money I couldn't really afford to ActBlue. I lived on websites and blogs in August and September, trying to be yet another small voice of reason.

I am burning out. I turned off my tv and computer most of this month, the ups and downs of the media coverage, the public option is dead, the public option is alive, have taken their toll on me.

I know our legislative process is slow and these things take time, but it is so frustrating. And even if we "win" and get this done, so much of it won't go into effect for years. I have lowered my hopes and expectations, over and over. No Single Payer, medicare for all? Ok, I can live with a public option. No public option for everyone? Eek, well, ok, at least it's a start. A Public option, watered down, and give states ability to opt out? Ok, but really, this is the last compromise. Right? Right? Please.

[gladys46]

12:32 PM on 10/26/2009

I don't see it a "watering down" by allowing states to opt in or out! In my estimation, it's not what these titles are but what the plans will do for the people in reducing costs and assuring that ins.cos cannot drop people arbitrarily!

I did hear Pelosi mention having some factors of the final bill check in immediately !

[Rhiana]

12:38 PM on 10/26/2009

The watering down I was referring to was not specifically the opt in/opt out measures, but that the public option will not be widely available to anyone who wants it, but only to those that meet certain conditions.

I love free choice. You want to give the states a choice? Fine by me. Let's see which states actually deny a choice to their own people.

[psychodog]

12:46 PM on 10/26/2009

The main problem with the opt-out, is that states that opt-out will be giving private insurance a huge windfall in profits... because the insurance mandate will still apply.

So the opt-out doesn't really get them to cut their costs, it instead gives them the incentive to lobby at the state level to get them to opt-out.

[KarateKid]

12:33 PM on 10/26/2009

Your second sentence.....are you sure everything is covered. You might have a pre-existing condition you are not aware of, and won't know until you get sick.

That is one of the major points of this reform, to eliminate the pre-existing conditions. I'd say that is almost as significant as a robuse public option would be.

[Rhiana]

01:22 PM on 10/26/2009

The No pre-existing conditions is definitely a big positive.

I am viewing the whole thing as a house of cards. We have removed as much of the foundation of reform as can taken out, or the whole thing collapses, and we are left with a bigger mess.

A personal mandate, without a employer mandate, is questionable.

Any mandate without a public option, is unconscionable.

A public option with so many restrictions on who is eligible to participate is not really giving us a choice.

[wdw505]

12:14 PM on 10/26/2009

What are the unemployment numbers for democrat vs republican in preparation for this insurance screw up.......i know of many businesses doing targeted layoffs 90-95% democrat or non-voters. get someone not of your state to get the voter lists and someone else gets their voter lists meet in the middle and trade lists. now there is no paper or electronic trail.....­..terminat­e until the layoff number is near then toss the rest to republican­s........o­f course these practices are unethical and i would never practice them in my company....or just walk the parking lot and look at bumper stickers..­.....since a greater percentage of businesses or owned by conservati­ves.......­.

[Aerows]

12:22 PM on 10/26/2009

I know what the unemployment numbers are for Republican politicians. Hopefully, for the good of our nation, it stays that way.

[wdw505]

12:30 PM on 10/26/2009

that was not my question now was it?

[KarateKid]

12:31 PM on 10/26/2009

Hah, keep slingin' those aerows, Aerows. LOL. Maybe one will strike the right spot and they'll grow a brain. Fanned.

[Wisconsin Dave]

12:26 PM on 10/26/2009

Republicians are the voice of our rich ruling class,
and virtually all of business is of the rich and powerful ruling class.

[gladys46]

12:28 PM on 10/26/2009

So you think that there are no rich democrats who own businesses???

[Wisconsin Dave]

12:32 PM on 10/26/2009

About 95% of employees work for companies ruled by conservatives.