25 Blue Dogs Have Said They Support a Public Option [View All]

[cal04]

By: Jane Hamsher
http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/28/25-blue-dogs-have-said-they-support-a-public-optoin/

The fact that a Blue Dog has supported a public option in the past does not mean that they will support one now -- their principles tend to be lobbyist-flexible. But Nate Silver's number crunching (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/analysis-public-option-is-likely.html) indicates that most of those who have done so in the past probably have majority support for a public option in their districts, so come 2010, they will have some explaining to do about why they flip-flopped. That's particularly true for those in California like Thompson and Schiff, who have significant Democratic majorities in their districts.

The list was primarily culled from the 20 Blue Dogs who signed on to the HCAN statement of principles, which endorses "a public insurance plan without a private insurer middleman that guarantees affordable coverage." It also advocated "using the public’s purchasing power to instill greater reliance on evidence-based protocols and lower drug and device prices" -- the very opposite of co-ops.

I also included those who signed the July 22 letter to Steny Hoyer stressing the importance of having a strong public option, one that is tied to "an established provider network, like Medicare" (PDF). I added those who voted for H.R. 3200 already as a member of one of the three committees that drafted it, and those who have made statements of support in the media for a public option.

List of Blue Dogs who have expressed support for a public option (with Nate Silver's estimate of district support/opposition in parenthesis):


More at Link