Top House Progressive: Backing Public "Trigger" Would Be "Surrender"

[Better Believe It]

Top House Progressive: Backing Public "Trigger" Would Be "Surrender"
The Plum LineGreg Sargent's blog
September 8, 2009

Dem Rep. Raul Grijalva, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is issuing a strong rebuke to fellow liberals who may be inclined to accept a compromise involving a public option “trigger,” saying it would amount to waving a “white flag” and “a surrender.”

Grijalva made the claim after I checked in with his office for a comment on today’s Roll Call story reporting that some “key” House progressives are open to such a compromise. In a statement emailed to me, Grijalva said that most House progressives would in fact stand firm and still vote against a bill with a trigger:

“The vast majority of CPC is not prepared to wave a white flag on public option. A trigger would be a surrender.”

If the “vast majority” of the five dozen or so House progressives did vote against the bill, as Grijalva vows they would, it wouldn’t pass.

Also noteworthy: Grijalva’s description of a trigger as “surrender” leaves liberals no wiggle room to support it. When it comes to the trigger, House progressive leaders are refusing to budge.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/top-house-progressive-backing-public-option-trigger-would-be-surrender/

[Better Believe It]

1. health care reform without a public option will be as meaningful as a manicure for a gunshot victim

Without a public option, any effort at health care reform will be as meaningful as a manicure for a gunshot victim. "The public option is the main thing on the table," says Michael Behan, an aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. "It's really coming down to that."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong/2