Sanchez Breaks From ‘Blue Dog Coalition,’ Endorses Public Plan

[babylonsister]

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/10/blue-dog-principles/

Sanchez Breaks From ‘Blue Dog Coalition,’ Endorses Public Plan

House Democratic leaders were planning to unveil a final health care reform bill today, but on the eve of the announcement, a group of “Blue Dog Democrats” released a list of demands that have forced the leadership to wait until next week as Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer attempt to broker a compromise.

In a letter to Speaker Pelosi, the conservative “Blue Dog” members claimed that they are concerned about the cost of the health care bill:

Paying for care reform must start with finding savings within the current delivery system and maximizing the value of our health care dollar before we ask the public to pay more. <…>

The discussion draft fails to include adequate structural changes that will succeed in lowering costs and increasing value.

But the letter also comes out against a public plan, which is one of the primary tools to rein in health care costs over the long-term. The letter complains, “‘A Medicare-like’ public option would negatively impact hospitals, doctors and patients…using Medicare’s below-market rates would seriously weaken the financial stability of our local hospitals and doctors.”

Igor Volsky notes there’s “an inherent contradiction” in this letter: the Blue Dogs want to find more savings within the system, but they’re also asking that the bill spend more.

Fortunately, there is at least one “Blue Dog” member who understands this contradiction and is willing to break from her coalition to support a public plan. On MSNBC this afternoon, Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) said, “I am one of those people who believes that we should be required to have a public option because it will bring the costs of health care down.”

Watch it at link:

Sanchez is right. If the “Blue Dogs” wanted to stick to their principles of bringing costs down, they’d join with Sanchez to endorse a public plan.

[WeDidIt]

1. This is a significant development

If we can peel off a few more Blue Dogs, you'll see the moderate Republicans in the House getting antsy.

[babylonsister]

2. I think so, too. Hopefully she'll lead the way, especially after

reading this...

Igor Volsky notes there’s “an inherent contradiction” in this letter: the Blue Dogs want to find more savings within the system, but they’re also asking that the bill spend more.

Who are they listening to? :crazy:

[jasi2006]

4. They are just listening to the anti-Obama folks.

You may not want to believe this, but there a quite a few Dems in Congress who cringe at the thoughts of any Obama successes. They used his coat-tails but they are still ...you know... in their hearts.

[redqueen]

3. Awesome.

So glad to hear this. :)

[Beetwasher]

5. We're Gonna See More Of This

The pressure is building. The public WANTS this and the reps must be getting hammered.

[The Magistrate]

6. These People Will Lose their Seats If they Keep this Up, Ma'am

They are completely mis-reading the politics of the matter. People voted for them over their Republican opponent because they wanted them to support President Obama's initiatives. If instead they obstruct these, they will lose every swing voter they got....

[slipslidingaway]

7. If they were really concerned about costs they would be

endorsing a single-payer, not for profit system.

[rateyes]

8. How would it weaken the financial stability of the hospitals?

All the people who now use the emergency room for a doctor's office and end up getting free care would, under a public plan, be paying for the service.

Gawd, the Blue Dogs are insufferable.

[shraby]

9. The Blue dogs are a perfect example why

competency tests are needed for people to qualify for public office. Some are dumber than a shit-house rat.
Republicans are the prime example and blue dogs are not much smarter.

Edited to add

[berni_mccoy]

10. Let other Blue Dogs know they should join her (LINK)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6032104

[slipslidingaway]

11. If the public option pays doctors less than a private plan and

doctors are not forced to accept public option patients, then it could be harder for them to find a doctor.

Only 2% of Medical students plan to enter the primary care field, Sanders has spoken of the coming primary care doctor shortage, the doctors will be able to choose patients who have a higher reimbursement rate...and that could be those who have private insurance.

I would also think that private companies will try and make it easier for doctors to get reimbursed, it may reduce their bottom line, but it will make sure that they Have a bottom line.

Before we think all doctors in in it just for the money, we also have to realize that many graduates will have substantial debt once they finish school.


“‘A Medicare-like’ public option would negatively impact hospitals, doctors and patients"


I think there will be competition among groups for access to doctors in addition to health care funding and a main reason I support a single-payer, not for profit, Medicare for All, HR 676 plan instead of a fragmented system.

[slipslidingaway]

12. kick nt