Share

Howard Dean Calls Public Option Indispensable

by: Philip Elliott  |  The Associated Press

photo
Howard Dean urged the administration to stand by statements made early on in the debate in which it steadfastly insisted that a public option was indispensable to genuine change. (Photo: Reuters Pictures)

    Washington – Former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean said Monday he doubts there can be meaningful health care reform without a direct government role, putting him at odds with President Barack Obama who says such a public option is only a sliver of the solution.

    Dean, a leading figure among the party's liberals, carefully tried to avoid criticizing the president openly, but he urged the administration to stand by statements made early on in the debate in which it steadfastly insisted that such a public option was indispensable to genuine change. Dean said Medicare and the Veterans Administration are "two very good programs that have been around for a long time."

    Dean appeared on morning news shows Monday amid increasing indications the Obama White House is retreating from the public option in the face of vocal opposition from Republicans and some vocal participants at a town-hall-style meetings around the country.

    The former Vermont governor was asked on NBC's "Today" show about Obama's statement over the weekend that the public option for insurance coverage was "just a sliver" of the overall proposal. Obama's health and human services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, advanced that line, telling CNN Sunday that a direct government role in a system intended to provide virtually universal coverage was "not the essential element."

    Dean, a physician, argued that a public option is fair and said there must be such a choice in any genuine shake up of the existing system.

    "You can't really do health reform without it," he said. Dean maintained that the health insurance industry has "put enormous pressure on patients and doctors" in recent years.

    He called a direct government role "the entirety of health care reform. It isn't the entirety of insurance reform ... We shouldn't spend $60 billion a year subsidizing the insurance industry."

    Dean also said he doesn't foresee any Republican support for a public option. "I don't think the Republicans are interested and in order to have a bipartisan bill, you've got to have both sides interested," he said.

    The shift in the administration's stance on a government-run insurance program leaves open a chance for compromise with Republicans that probably would enrage Obama's liberal supporters but could deliver a much-needed victory on a top domestic priority.

    Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., who is co-chairman of the Middle Class Caucus, said that "leaving private insurance companies the job of controlling the costs of health care is like making a pyromaniac the fire chief."

    But Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., told reporters in Philadelphia on Monday that the success of health care overhaul doesn't hinge on any one element and co-ops might provide the same results under a different name.

    "I believe that the president has to make the evaluation as a matter of leadership as to what the administration wants to do. There is an alternative to the so-called public option by having co-ops. I think these matters are subject to exploration," Specter said.

    Officials from both political parties are looking for concessions while Congress is on an August recess. Facing tough audiences, lawmakers and the White House are looking for a way to cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured while maintaining political standing.

    Sebelius said the White House would be open to co-ops instead of a public option β€” a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory.

    Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.

    With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.

    "I think there will be a competitor to private insurers," Sebelius said. "That's really the essential part, is you don't turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing."

    Obama's spokesman refused to say a public option was a make-or-break choice.

    "What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

    A day before, Obama appeared to hedge his bets.

    "All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform," Obama said at a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colo. "This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."

    Lawmakers have discussed the co-op model for months, although the Democratic leadership and the White House have said they prefer a government-run option.

    Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, called the argument for a government-run public plan little more than a "wasted effort." He added there are enough votes in the Senate for a cooperative plan.

    --------

    Associated Press Writer Kathy Matheson in Philadelphia contributed to this report.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

  

»


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

Let's not quibble. HR 676,

Let's not quibble. HR 676, S703 - universal single pay - the only way to go .

A bill without a public

A bill without a public option will just be a massive bailout for big pharma and big insurance, and will bankrupt our country. I'm counting on our progressive Representative and Senators to kill this thing if it does not have a provision for public insurance. "Co-operatives" are NOT a substitute!!

The Democrats and Obama are

The Democrats and Obama are blowing away the biggest mandate since FDR. FDR passed the New Deal bills without Republican bipartisanship. Obama and the Democrats can do the same with either single payer or it's junior, the public option. But because of insurance and BIG PHARMA campaign contributions at stake, it's getting messy.

America, being the world's

America, being the world's oldest democracy, is, not surprisingly, the most reactionary.

Let's be honest folks. You

Let's be honest folks. You didn't seriously expect any health care reform--except the current model under a sweet name--to come out of Washington, did you? Suckers!

What is "The Public Option"?

What is "The Public Option"? If it is forcing the poor onto Medicaid and leveraging our children against us, then I'd rather stand in a farmer's field waiting for the Remote Area Medical Expedition. In 2003 my son needed some dental work and we took him to a medicaid funded dentist. Other than referring us to a dental clinic in Rochester, New York, over a hundred miles away, and reporting us to Child Protective Services, he did nothing. The Dental Clinic in Rochester told us we would be placed on a nine month waiting list, that my son would lose both of his front teeth, and that it would cost $3,000 to $4,000 dollars, which of course medicaid would pay. After making the long trip back home to Ithaca my son's teacher helped me find a dentist here. This time we made no mention of medicaid, offering instead to pay cash. The dentist charged us $130.00 and my son still has all his teeth today, and regular check-ups, which his mom and I pay for ourselves. This has been the truth.

OK - give up on a public

OK - give up on a public option, surge up the war in Afghanistan, cave in on Guantanamo, quit trying to lower carbon emissions, keep "Don't ask don't tell," maintain the Bush test-test-test approach to improving education, give the Bush/Cheney high crimes & misdemeanors crowd a pass - - - Yes, we can! We elected Barack Obama because he stood for something -- we thought. It's time for him to stand up, stand up against the hateful rabble-rousing Repugnicans, and fulfill his promises. Otherwise, goodby to our hopes to return to a country American once tried to be.

Obama's first mistake was to

Obama's first mistake was to not originally strongly go for the single-payer plan. He would then have had the public option plan to fall back on as a compromise. Unfortunately, he now has to fight very strongly to get anything close to real sustainable competition against the insurance industry with their heavily moneyed interests and their Congressional lackeys.

What is the media's latest

What is the media's latest effort to assist in the ruling classes time honored technique of divide and conquer? It's to use labels, and all the bias, confusion that comes with them. Notice how the AP suddenly reported that that it's a group called the "left" that has the biggest issue with Obama's public option hiccup. Or, in this article it's the liberals that John Dean speaks for. Total Rot! It's corporations, and then everyone else. Most are for single payer.

A public option is truly

A public option is truly indispensable to genuine change. The world is watching to see if the corporations will win this one, as the war machine we unleashed eats everything else here of value, and is a future danger to our rights and the machinations of the Constitution itself. The safeguards are not working when war dollars for Haliburton and Darkwater replace citizen welfare. Don't let the commies get you down.

Let's not play games here -

Let's not play games here - the public option is the only economical and practical way to do health care financing reform effectively. Let us remember that the early Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) were not for-profit cooperatives that were eventually bought out by health insurers and turned into for-profit entities. This would eventually be the fate of these new reform cooperatives that we hear so much about these days. I believe in competition and market based solutions to control health care costs and improve quality. However you will get neither in a system that: 1) the federal government does not play an active role (public option) in the market; 2) insurers/HMOs collude to control local and statewide markets and 3) where insurers/HMOs control state insurance departments. So how can you prevent any entity federal government department or non-profit organization from converting into a for-profit organization and becoming just like the present HMOs/insurers? The answer is that you can't prevent any organization from converting to a for-profit or not-for-profit entity. However, you can make it damn hard for them to do it, so hard as to rendering a for-profit conversion not feasible.

In addition to the other

In addition to the other Bush-like behavior cited here, Obama is on vacation.

Of course the AP headlines

Of course the AP headlines have branded this an issue only liberals care about. Here's an idea: Why don't we stop funding the Pentagon and let military concerns be taken up by private non-profit co-ops? Here's another idea: Why don't we draft Howard Dean to represent us in the next election? Clearly The President is going to need a little competition from his left to remind him what the majority who elected him hired him to do. It was easy for bush jr. to get his agenda through without accomplishing anything in his first several months of office. Back then, he was just biding his time waiting for his "Pearl Harbor moment" to push his decades-old agenda down our throats. Intentionally allowing national tragedies to happen is not a good strategy for a Democrat. That only works when a republican is in office.

Bipartisanship is supposed

Bipartisanship is supposed to be a two-way street. What the Democrats consistently do is giving in and giving up, it is not bipartisanship. It doesn't matter how right the Democrats are, it doesn't even matter how many people support them. It just takes a few people yelling loudly (yelling lies, no less), and they get scared and give in. What we need is leadership, but we get chickenship. Thanks, O-bawk-bawk-bawk-bama. Maybe if us liberals all went out and bought tons of guns and ammo and screamed nonsense at the tops of our lungs, maybe the people we put in office would finally listen to us.

Is there NO ONE in this

Is there NO ONE in this god-forsaken administration who will stand up for We The People against the corporatists who have owned and operated "our" government for the past 40+ years?! Are Bush's policies suddenly fine-and-dandy just because they are now espoused by a "Democrat"? I predict that, in spite of all the complaints and threats we are now hearing from "progressives", 90% of these same "progressives" will STILL vote for the so-called "Lesser Evils" again in 2010 and 2012, rather than get off their asses and organize an alternative party that WILL represent US.

A system as efficient (and

A system as efficient (and well-proven) as a Canadian-style "Single Payer" healthcare plan should not be the 'hard sell' this administration would have us believe it is. 'Single Payer' would pretty much 'sell' itself IF "Democrats" in Washington were willing to provide facts and honest information to the voters. Early on Mr. Obama, his corporate advisors and cabinet members, and his Blue Dog allies in Congress made a decision not to even CONSIDER such an (objectively) sensible program--a program which polls indicate would be supported by a significant majority of the American people...IF it were explained to them. 'Single-Payer' was IMMEDIATELY swept "off The Table" before most people even knew it was an option. This move does NOT pass the "Smell Test". Let's face it...the American People have been HAD on this issue (as they have on LGBTQ issues, Peace issues, Government Transparency issues, Economic issues...and a multitude of other issues where we were led to expect CHANGE).

Is this Waterloo for Obama

Is this Waterloo for Obama and the Dems?? Bring back Howard Dean for integrity and guts. If no single-payer or public option then no bill or veto the bill and start over. A simple bill is needed that extends Medicare to the whole population that is funded by cuts in wasteful military spending and endless wars along with rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Americans will also save money by cutting out the health care deniers (insurance/Ponzi companies with their huge profits). Also remove the cap on Social Security taxes to provide more money. If Obama and the Dems can't deliver anything it may be time for a new party (Ed Schultz suggests a Middle Class Party may be needed). Obama needs to act more like FDR and less like Harry Reid.

Dear 12:04 β€” Medicaid

Dear 12:04 β€” Medicaid Survivor: Now you see the damage that can be done by not FUNDING programs.

You know, if Obama had done

You know, if Obama had done the right thing (and the smart thing) and pushed for single payer, I'd be more upset about this and more willing to fight. The "public option" is already a huge compromise, so starting from there was a huge mistake. Now it is being compromised into a weak public option, or none at all. What did they expect? Liberals would be fighting much harder, donating more money, and showing up at the town hall meetings if this was a fight for single payer. It's not worth wasting my time and money to fight for mediocre half-measure that will cost more while doing much less good than the real solution: single payer.

Once again... Single Payer

Once again... Single Payer works in other countries and it seems that the president is unwilling to stand up to the special interests and bought off congressman and fight for our chance at having it here. I voted for him because of his stand on this and his understanding for the need for real change. To hell with a bipartisan plan that takes into account the republicans stand. What have they ever stood for that benefited working folks in this country? Stand up and fight for what you really believe in Mr President!

Do y'all wanna know how to

Do y'all wanna know how to get President Obama back on Community Organizing track with We the People? REPLACE RAHM EMANUEL WITH HOWARD DEAN . . . NOW!

This is democracy in action

This is democracy in action - the majority of the people are AGAINST government control of health care, so the politicians are starting to do what they are supposed to do - represent the people. As for Canada, they are starting a ground swell movement to eliminate their "model" government controlled health care because it is vastly inferior to what we in the U.S. have today. Get your head out, people!