The Hill:

Liberal activists are concerned that Congress will leave out what they see as the most important element of healthcare reform: a government-backed insurance program.

I guess it’s fair to say that those activists quoted in the article qualify as “liberal,” but with 76% of the country in favor of a public plan, it hardly seems to be an exclusive concern of the left.

James Protzman says “Senator Hagan’s statements are a shuffle of non-committal waffling and triangulation that would make a marshmallow fruit salad wiggle”:

[N]o one I know favors the so-called co-op program except for insurance companies and Republicans in the Senate. And for good reason. The “co-op” program does nothing to address the deep structural problems in our health care system that are driving up costs without commensurate benefits in quality.

I think she’s confusing “Blue State” with “Blue Cross.”

When even somebody like Jell-O Jay Rockefeller can find a spine when it comes to doing the right thing on health care, there’s not much of an excuse for anyone else not to follow his lead. That includes my own congressional representative, Betty McCollum.

The latest rumor going around: The Minnesota Supreme Court will rule this coming Thursday (July 2), it will rule for Franken, and the ruling will direct Tim Pawlenty to sign the election certificate without delay.

In this morning’s Washington Post Ceci Connolly is out with a piece highlighting the tension between advocates of the public option and centrist Democratic Senators who have decided to serve as a road block for health care reform: The rising tensions between Democratic legislators and constituencies that would typically be their natural allies underscore the [...]

Whipcount. What some of the NY State blogs have to say about the public option in healthcare reform.

ort.

We need 40 members of the House who will commit now to hold those “no” votes on a bad health care bill if and when the time comes.

This New York Times article, Little Hope For GOP to Support Health Bill, illustrates the problem with bipartisanship and getting Republican votes. It’s like people haven’t paid attention to the GOP votes against the stimulus bill, against the ACES bill, and against the S-CHIP bill. Why would they vote for the health bill out of the Senate Finance Committee after showing such a consistent pattern of votes against President Obama’s agenda?

Why were these concessions even there in the final package? What was the purpose of these concessions? Did we even really need these concessions? While I’m happy that 83% of carbon emissions will be reduced, I’m not happy about the concessions to the coal and nuclear industries. And they weren’t necessary from my point of view.

It’s a knife that cuts both ways: Republicans’ primary objection is the Democrats’ push for a public health insurance plan that would serve as an alternative to private coverage. Republicans say such a plan would cause the private insurance market to unravel. There is also the potential 10-year price tag of $1 trillion or more [...]