Public Option: Dodd Gets It Done, House Update

by: tparty

Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 13:23:02 PM EDT

As I said, it remains to be seen whether we can pull together the votes to make that happen. But I've learned in my time in Washington that compromise is important, but it's always worthwhile to stand your ground on the issues that matter most.  That's how we passed the Family and Medical Leave Act, credit card reform, FDA regulation of tobacco, and many other issues I've worked on over the years. We can't give up on a public option even if it is an uphill battle.  And so I won't. And I know you won't, either.

Earlier this month, he repeated the same promise not to give up on the public option fight:

But we have come too far, and worked too hard, to settle for "pretty good."  And that's why I plan to take a stand.

First, and let me be very clear about this: I am going to fight for a strong public option.  The simple, undeniable fact is that a public option will save money - and it will introduce more choice and competition into an industry that badly needs both.  It is the single best way to keep costs low for middle class families - and keep the insurance companies honest.  And I am by no means ready to back down on making that argument.

Yesterday, Harry Reid announced his intent to proceed with the HELP committee's public option with an opt-out provision.

Whatever happens in the coming weeks -- and the fight is by no means close to being over -- this is a significant victory for Senator Dodd. All along, the conventional wisdom was that the Finance Committee's health care bill would have precedence over anything coming out of Sen. Dodd's HELP committee in the merging process. That conventional wisdom has been debunked, and President Snowe and Vice President Baucus are now less relevant to the process than ever -- and progressives in the House and Senate more relevant.

CCAG has a post up urging constituents to thank Sen. Dodd for his leadership on the public option fight.

In the House, the language of the merged bill that will come to the floor is still largely uncertain. Steny Hoyer says it could emerge by the end of this week, and hinted to reporters this morning that it may include a public option with negotiated rates, not Medicare +5 rates:

Though the robust public option has a great deal of support among Democrats, Hoyer asks rhetorically "What additional numbers can you add by going to negotiated rates?...[W]e don't have that exact number. But certainly there are people who want the negotiated rates who would add themselves to the number [that support a robust public option] that is anywhere between 200 and 218 at this point in time."

It seems clear that John Larson's declaration last week that Democrats "had the votes" for a "robust" public option was either premature or imprecise - since whether to include the Medicare +5% public option, largely considered the most "robust" plan under consideration, is still being debated.

One more update: while Jim Himes' office would not confirm his position on the Medicare +5% public option last week, his name has been absent in the most recent target lists, and his office has apparently privately indicated to others that he would support Medicare +5% if it came to the floor.