Inventor Of The Public Option: Pass This Bill

[Undercurrent]

Now that the core demand of progressives has been removed from the Senate health care bill--namely, the public health insurance option--should progressives continue to support the effort?

For me, the question is particularly difficult. I have been the thinker most associated with the public option, which I’ve long argued is essential to ensuring accountability from private insurers and long-term cost control. I was devastated when it was killed at the hands of Senator Joe Lieberman, not least because of what it said about our democracy -- that a policy consistently supported by a strong majority of Americans could be brought down by a recalcitrant Senate minority.

It would therefore be tempting for me to side with Howard Dean and other progressive critics who say that health care reform should now be killed.

It would be tempting, but it would be wrong.

Since the first campaign for publicly guaranteed health insurance in the early twentieth century, opportunities for serious health reform have come only rarely and fleetingly. If this opportunity passes, it will be very long before the chance arrives again. Many Americans will be gravely hurt by the delay. The most progressive president of my generation--the generation that came of age in the anti-government shadow of Ronald Reagan--will be handed a crippling loss. The party he leads will be branded as unable to govern.
more... http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-treatment/why-i-still-believe-bill

[treestar]

1. Interesting point about the President

We have 3 years left; only real haters would want him to have problems with other bills.

[SIMPLYB1980]

2. Watch out for the crazy bus.

:hide:

[grantcart]

3. lol

[SIMPLYB1980]

5. lol

:spank:

[mcablue]

17. Do you have evidence that this man really is the "inventor of the public option"?

Even the article in the TNR linked to by the OP does not call him the "inventor of the public option".

[Teaser]

4. mass downrec in 5,4,3,2...

.

[Zodiak]

6. Key paragraph

"So a bill must pass. Yet it must be a better bill that passes. And it must be understood by the President, the Congress and every American as only a step--an important but ultimately incomplete step--toward the vital goal that the campaign for the public option embodied: good affordable health care for every American."

Even this guy says that the bill should not pass in its present form. That's what Dean is saying....that's what the entire left is saying.

He has a lot of contingencies in his argument, too....one is that the bill must be fixed often before its effective date, but of course gives no promises that will happen, only his belief that the political will may exist.

If this bill stays like the Senate version, IT IS NOT WORTH PASSING.

Funny also that he does not mention the consequences of passing the bill in its present form and then no attempt to fix it comes along.

[Undercurrent]

7. We don't yet know what the

final bill will look like.

[Zodiak]

10. Which is an excellent argument for not berating doubtful Democrats into supporting it

Support requires evidence, not promises and hopes. Telling people that they are "irrational" and "purists" for not supporting a bill no one has seen is a little on the presumptuous side.

What I have read in the Senate bill plus these new compromises does not constitute a passable bill at all. The author of the OP agrees with me....the difference between him and me is that he is taking a "pass the bill" position with the hope of fixing it BEFORE IT PASSES, and I am withdrawing support in the hopes of getting it back to the table BEFORE IT PASSES because hoping that these Democrats will not further sell us out is a little too far of a stretch for me at this point.

Both of us think the Senate bill is a steaming pile of shit and should not pass.

The way the OP is presented here on DU is misleading because this gentleman takes a very nuanced position. It should not be spun to be a "pass this bill AS-IS because it has good things in it" argument, because it is far from the truth.

[Undercurrent]

12. Not sure why you think my comment

was an an effort to "berate' (to scold or condemn vehemently and at length). If you find some satisfaction in thinking that I can't stop you.

Hacker's position is nuanced, well thought out, and an interesting addition to the discussion. I welcome it.

[Zodiak]

13. Sorry...it is true you presented it neutrally

But the way the title is worded, people were simply taking it at face value. The "berate" comment was more directed there and elsewhere at the many, many attacks against lefties I have been seeing for a few days. Sorry I was not clear to whom my passages were directed.

[Joe Chi Minh]

11. What makes them think it will be a long time before another health-care reform

bill comes along? They always sound so sure of that, they don't feel any need to explain why that must be the case.

You know what it sounds like to me? That very familiar, very primitive sales ploy: 'The offer is only open until blah blah.' 'Limited stocks! Hurry while they last!'

[SpartanDem]

14. Maybe past history

After Nixon's failure it wasn't attempted again until Clinton and we know how after that it take for Congress to try again

[Joe Chi Minh]

18. But circumstances change all the time, and now things are in a greater

state of flux and uncertainty than ever.

[ShortnFiery]

8. You people are SHAMELESS. Kill this piece of TRASH. eom

[phleshdef]

9. The most progressive president of my generation-the generation that came of age in the anti-gov.

...shadow of Ronald Reagan

That alone sums up the broader reality of Obama's presidency and exactly how badly some have forgotten how things actually HAVE changed quite a bit, and way more in the direction of "better" than "worse".

[depakid]

15. "The party he leads will be branded as unable to govern."

That unfortunately will be the case in any event... thanks to the failure to use reconciliation.

[mcablue]

16. There's no evidence this man is the "inventor of the public option?

How can an American invent something that exists in other countries but does not exist here? Is there any evidence that this is the "inventor of the public option?" Unrecommended for the lack of that evidence.

The word "inventor" is not even mentined in the TNR article linked to by the OP.

[andym]

19. He is acknowledged as providing the theoretical underpinning for an Exchange + Public Option

that was the inspiration for Edwards', Clinton's and Obama's plans. Of course, he envisioned a public option with more than 100 million people in it in order for the system to work well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Hacker
From wikipedia:

"Hacker is a media contributor and has testified before the United States Congress. He was widely recognized as a contributor to the health care plans for three of the leading Democratic candidates — Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John Edwards — in the presidential election of 2008.<3> Hacker's plan, Health Care for America, is outlined in a report for the Economic Policy Institute. It proposes providing health care for uninsured or under-insured Americans by requiring employers to either provide insurance to their workers or enroll them in a new, publicly overseen insurance pool. People in this pool could choose either a public plan modeled after Medicare or from regulated private plans."

[BeyondGeography]

20. "These are signal achievements, and they all would have been politically unthinkable

just a few years ago."

K&R