Ezra Klein: A Tale of Two Public Options

[flpoljunkie]

Emphasis mine.

A Tale of Two Public Options


Photo credit: By Win McNamee – Getty Images

The Senate Finance Committee is fighting the public option wars today. Senator Jay Rockefeller's public option was voted down, 8 to 15. Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln, Kent Conrad, Tom Carper and Bill Nelson all voted with the Republicans. But some of them could flip sides to vote for Chuck Schumer's coming public option.

Weird, right?

Rockefeller's public option is the "strong" public option. It attaches itself to Medicare's payment rates and provider network. The CBO estimates that it would save the government $125 billion over 10 years, and it would save even more for consumers and businesses. But that money would come out of the health-care industry's pocket. The plan's superior pricing power would take customers from private insurance. Rural senators already feel that Medicare shortchanges their hospitals, and fear that this would only further depress reimbursements.

Schumer's public option is the "weak," or "level-playing field," incarnation. It can't attach itself to Medicare. It's not expected to produce much in the way of savings or attract much in the way of customers. It'll be a competitor to the private insurance industry, but not a particularly potent one. That means it's not much of a threat to the private industry, and it doesn't harm rural hospitals, or really anyone else. That makes it easier for some Democrats to support.

The end result of all this is that Rockefeller's amendment is the one with the best chance to work, but Schumer's is the amendment with the best chance to pass.

Update:: Schumer's amendment failed, 10-13. Nelson and Carper flipped to support it. Conrad, Baucus, and Lincoln voted against.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/09/a_tale_of_two_public_options.html

[Oregone]

1. Mind boggling. They aren't even pretending its about fiscal conservatism anymore

They are contradicting the CBO.

So, is a "strong" public option dead? If so, how many are hopping off the "Reform for the Sake of Reform" bandwagon?

[flpoljunkie]

2. Probably. Even though it would 'definitely bend the cost curve'--unlike Schumer's version.