In just a few short weeks, the public option has moved from afterthought to center stage. This happened because the American people made their voices heard and overwhelmed the insurance companies and special interests.
And although we're close to the finish line on health care, now is not the time to relent. There are still those who oppose a public option and will stand in the way of once-in-a-lifetime reform. The prelude is over. The real battle has begun.
Those who support the public option will prevail, but only if we follow the formula that got us here.
Left for dead a few weeks ago, there are four reasons why the public option will survive this intense fight, despite millions of dollars in insurance industry money pushing in the opposite direction.
First, we gave the American people direct access to Congress. Though polls have consistently shown that a majority of Americans support the public option, Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle treated the issue as a marginal part of the debate.
We were able to use the Internet to cut through the Washington apathy and reach the millions of Americans who support a public option. My site alone (www.CountdowntoHealthCare.com) amassed over 60,000 signatures for the public option. Hundreds of thousands more have joined Facebook groups or Twitter campaigns dedicated to a real public health care option
Using the Internet, those of us fighting for a public option were able to create a direct conduit to the halls of Congress. We opened up the process beyond the usual crowd of lobbyists and special interests, and turned an experiment in open government into results. We showed that a vocal minority with deep pockets can't overwhelm the will of the people.
Second, because we were able to make this debate truly public, it became about merits rather than insider politics. And when that happened, my Democratic colleagues recognized that the public option is the only solution to the main problem with our nation's health care system: costs.
We pay too much for health care, and, as a result, millions of Americans either can't choose the quality coverage they want, or can't afford health care at all. Millions more simply pay higher premiums each year, slowly eroding their financial stability.
The only way we can truly contain these skyrocketing costs is by providing real competition to an industry starved of it. A public option, with less overhead and free of the profit motive that plagues insurance companies, could do this.
Despite the merits of the argument and despite the public outcry, the minority opposing the public option has been loud and well-financed. A healthy dose of misinformation hasn't hurt, either.
But I commend my colleagues in the House and Senate who, undeterred, worked to deliver a public option to the American people. Speaker Pelosi never wavered, and insisted on the importance of a strong public option, even when she worried that she might not have the votes from some of my Democratic friends.
In the Senate, it took some creativity and determination, but they got it done. My predecessor in the House, Senator Chuck Schumer, first proposed the idea of an opt-out public option a few weeks ago, which would allow states to leave the program by 2014. It's an intriguing proposal, and one that I believe has real promise if we give the public option a chance to get up and running before governors can choose to pull the plug.
Despite the fact an Independent, a Republican and two Democratic Senators have reservations about a public option, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has refused to let the minority trample over the demands of an entire nation. He embraced the opt-out proposal as a central feature of the bill he plans to bring to the Senate floor.
Third, we used our majority the right way. Last year, Americans sent a clear signal when they gave Democrats a majority in order to deliver a "change" agenda. Health care is at the top of that list. Americans have suffered for too long under the burden of endlessly rising health care costs. Our job was to rise above the back and forth of politics and come up with a plan that could contain those costs.
That's what a majority is supposed to do.
Now we need a fourth and final element: the President. Back on September 9th, President Obama said he supported a public option, but insisted it was only one means to an end, and asked us to keep an open mind.
Now we need the president to stand up again and help push the public option past the finish line. Only he can provide the momentum we need to pass a bill. No voice is louder, no appeal more inspiring.
We're on the cusp of health care reform that includes a public option. This is further than the skeptics ever thought we would be, but there is still work to be done.
An unprecedented grassroots movement in favor of the public option, amplified by the Internet, has changed the nature of our political debate. But I worry that Congress may revert to old habits of political rhetoric and distraction.
We also know that the minority opposition will not rest until the President signs a bill. Senator Joseph Lieberman, an Independent, has said that he would filibuster the bill with Republicans. If the forces of obstruction will not rest, then neither can we.
Americans who want quality, affordable health care need to make their support for a public option heard. With their voices and, hopefully, one last nudge from the president, we have a chance to turn a long awaited dream into a reality.
Marcia Angell, M.D.: Is the House Health Care Bill Better than Nothing?
The House Health bill just throws good money after the bad. And because costs will keep rising, there is now a danger that people will conclude reform is impossible, when in reality, we still haven't really tried.
That said Iike to know WHAT IS PLAN B AND WHEN. If Dems maintain their control as is, WILL THEY TRY AGAIN FOR A ROBUST PUBLIC OPTION OR SINGLE PAYER> OR HAVE THEY GIVEN UP?
Scrap this terrible corporate welfare bill and start over. If you can't deliver single payer then resign for failure to execute the duties of your office.
If, by a public option, you mean extending Medicare to every American, that's worth fighting for.
We should have Medicare for all. Keep the under 65 crowd separate from over for first 5 years to appease seniors and see how it will work. Allow people happy with their insurance to opt for private if they want, to appease the Republicans (and even allow them to buy insurance across state lines, but make private insurance rates support the regulatory structure necessary to keep this from being just an outright public shakedown, and remove public subsidies of private insurance by taxing that benefit as income if it is given to them through their employer.)
Medicare for all will benefit the broad public immediately, affect hundreds of millions of Americans positively immediately, and demonstrate the savings of such a plan almost immediately. The proposed public "option" will do none of those things.
The government is bending over backward for people happy with their insurance (mostly people who've never really needed it), but doing nothing for those of us with coverage who would have to think hard about putting on our brakes if our insurance company CEO or any of its adjusters walked in front of our cars (i.e., most of us who have truly needed our policies) .
Cenk Ungyr and Miles Mogelescu have to be right about what it really going on.
The whole Obama/Emanuel/Baucus "reform" effort is an insider deal to trade a mandate for people to buy overpriced for-profit insurance at extortion level rates with NO robust public options to lower costs (a.k.a. administrative overhead and exorbitant executive pay and bonuses) in exchange for the lion's share of insurance industry campaign cash in 2010 and 2012.
Progressives had the audacity to get in the way of their fat deal. Now that progressives actually expect the President to keep his campaign promises and a watered-down public option (in name only) is still alive, they are having trouble killing off what's left of the public option without the President's fingerprints all over it.
It never occurred to them that progressives would actually stand up for themselves, and their anger at Weiner explains the leaks from the White House about Weiner needing to "man up".
Giving away the store before negotiations ever began, refusing to draw a line in the sand and stand up and fight for the public option, deals with big pharma, should all have awakened everyone to the fact that the President's campaign last year was a total scam, assuming you weren't paying attention to his other broken promises and betrayals.
We are supposed to pretend there is a game of multidimensional chess going on. It's more like three-card monty and we're on the losing end.
Then, each individual would be able to take the money which would be spent on the public system and go to a private insurer and pay the difference, if they so desire or can afford to do it.
That would give everyone the choice, make everyone pay their fair share, and everyone would be covered. If one becomes unemployed, one goes on the public system if one does not want to continue with the private, but coverage would continue.
The public option could begin the reforms needed, such as paying far less for specialties and far more on primary care, less on pharms, and less for high-tech things. We have far too many MRI machines and that drives up costs, cut the number by 40% and utilize them sixteen hours a day and lower the individual cost by 40%. Go to Certificates of Need for Open Heart Programs and concentrate them so the basic, expensive expenditures serve more people and are utilized fully. That could cut the cost of Open Hearts by 30 to 40%. Those things could save BILLIONS. Multiply that in one hundred ways, get better care, and save, save, save.
We should be disgusted with our politicians.
Maybe BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats need to be abandoned and replaced by a new Conservative Party and new Progressive Party. At the least when you vote for a party then you are voting for a set of principles as well.
Right now the only thing we get out of a two party duopoly is varying degrees of corporate control.
We'll never constitutionally ban corporate money from politics. However, we can form a political party which does not accept corporate contributions as a matter of principle. Just because it is legal, doesn't mean any politician or party has to accept this form a legalized bribery. It's not "unilaterally disarming". It's choosing to find funding from honorable sources.
We also need electoral reforms that allows new parties and independents to flourish. Runoff elections, ranked-choice voting, even proportional representation should all be embraced by progressives.
Right now our corporate-financed duopoly doesn't serve the interests of democracy nor the American people.
Talk about being able to cut the deficit. That would result in HUGE savings with just one action. Then, let Medicare save the 27% in administrative costs over these private plans. Require them to use half of it to improve benefits, and with the additional savings from this act, the could cut overall federal expenditures by hundreds of billions per year.
Make it clear to all those Medicare beneficiaries that they would get improved coverage at smaller cost to them, and the MEDICARE PEOPLE WOULD HAMMER ANYONE NOT GOING ALONG WITH IT.
Then, require that all private insurers also adhere to those costs for reimbursement for pharms within two years and that the savings be passed on through lower premiums and co-pays. That could decrease premiums by $100 to $150 a month for the average family plan.
Then, we have the human toll upon the people of this country. Anyone who fights reform must truly hate this country and its' people.
Last night, I saw him when he was discussing the Wilson Guy of SC, and he referred to the guy as being one taco short of a combo.
Kucinich/Sanders 2012