In a town hall meeting with his constituents, Senator Conrad pushed his co-operative plan, and said that he would vote against the public option in any Senate health care package.
CARRINGTON, N.D. — Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. presented his cooperative health care proposal here Thursday and told an audience of 100 that he would not vote for a government-run health care program.
…
The proposal has received bipartisan support for several reasons, he said. The cooperative would offer a non-profit insurance option to compete with private health care. It would not be government run, he said.
Individuals, families and small business owners could stick with their current provider, or they could opt for the cooperative plan.
This is too rich for my blood. We have a Democratic Senator, who’s been pushing the co-operative line ever since the debate over health care reform heated up earlier this spring, and he’s a part of the Senate Finance Committee that is keeping the rest of the Senate Democrats out of their caucus talks. And he knows full well that his co-op plan wouldn’t help the majority of his constituents. In what’s been leaked about the Senate Finance bill, the co-operative plan actually is a series of regional co-operatives, which wouldn’t do anything to lower health premium costs for American families.
Once again, here’s what Howard Dean said about regional co-operatives in the rumored Baucus "Fauc-Us" health care plan:
"This talk about co-ops is a political compromise it is not a policy compromise," he said, of the discussions currently underway in the Senate Finance Committee. "And I think most people, on both sides of the aisle know that co-ops won’t work."
Asked about a column by long-time Democratic strategist Paul Begala, urging progressives not to shy away from tackling health care in a more incremental approach, Dean shot back: "The public option is incrementalism…. But there is no incrementalism without the public option." He explained: "If you don’t have a public option this bill is not even incremental, in terms of adequate health care reform… Paul is not entirely wrong. It is just that the last shred of reform is the public option."
I’m with Dean on this. The reconciliation of the Senate Finance bill with other parts of the health care legislation from the HELP Committee and the House side is going to be the hardest fight we’ll be having, because the "moderates" or the Blue Dogs will possibly be working hard to replace the public option with these ineffective regional co-operatives once they get back from recess.




63 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
What an asshole.
We need to vote down the whole bill if there is no public option.
To me, Conrad is pond-sucking scum for his little temper tantrums on behalf of his co-op plan.
I hope Ted Kennedy stays in Hyannisport, then, and doesn’t bother coming to DeeCee for a floor vote on this abomination. Better than anyone, he knows reform isn’t reform without a public option.
Paul Begala’s note is the quintessential progressive surrender to the majority. Conrad’s vote against the public plan is a total sell out to the health ‘industries’. He doesn’t even pretend to help the American people or to respond to the 76 % of the American people who want a public option.
Conrad also is trying to kill cap and trade.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..r-Big-Oil.
The only reason I’d consider moving to North Dakota would be to vote against Conrad in a Dem primary.
North Dakota sucks, that’s why when you screw something up in the Air Force they send you to Minot.
The best senator money can buy.
Because Amgen employs soooo many people in ND.
Kent was the kid who peed in the wading pool when you were little. Then again all that remains in Carrington, like most of rural ND, is a few hundred bewildered deathers to confused to leave and just waiting to participate in the only two enterprises still operating there. The nursing home and the funeral parlor.
Kent-they won’t remember what you tell them! Do the right thing. They won’t hold it against you.
Ah yes. The ultimate threat for any fuckup “Why not Minot”.
You AF guys probably got TDY pay there too! :)
signed
respectful dogface
Will he vote for cloture, though? That’s really what it comes down to, although Harry Reid wouldn’t know it. Will Conrad vote to end debate on a bill with a public option, even if he’ll vote against the bill itself?
Dean is absolutely correct. Single payer should always be the goal we demand. If you’re even going to talk about incrementalism, co-ops are not even on the radar screen. Public option is the one and only increment to getting to single-payer. Otherwise, blow the whole thing up.
Conrad, Kent – (D – ND) Class I
530 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2043
I’ve already phoned to let his staff know that if he fails to support a public option I’ll be delighted to work with Howard Dean to ensure that next election, Mr. Conrad will have no job.
I also detailed the polls showing support for a public option among Democrats and reminded the Senator that his job is to work for the Democrats and his constituents and the citizens of this country, not the insurance companies.
If he can’t remember that, I explained, I’ll be working hard to ensure that, next election cycle, he has no job.
Please call.
Pushback seems to be one of the few powers we citizens have left.
yeah and Rockefeller handily debunked co-ops
Listening to President Obama right now–he is on a stage in Montana this Friday PM.
Basically this “reform” is premised on protecting the current regime of for profit healthcare.
Insurance performed on a for profit basis in American healthcare is what brought us here in mid 2009.
If you are not going to take out for profit health insurance and switch over to non profit Single Payer this reform is not reforming anything.
This so called “co-op plan” seems much more about running any public option into failure being it is too small in scale to ever go up against well funded for profit insurers who do not want any Single Payer Plan ever to come into being in the United States.
This “co-op plan” has been exposed for the weak lines of reasoning that it presents for support of a co-op premise.
President Obama is now defending for profit health insurers–again–when he does this he buys into reform being crippled–ineffective–and ultimately will only postpone Single Payer.
President Obama now states he wants everyone to have to get into the current American healthcare regime dominated by for profit insurance–it is difficult to see where any real reform or forward going solution can come out of a for profit healthcare premise if cost control is at the middle of this so called reform.
The profits need to be taken out and the notion of sick people furnishing profits must be arrested.
Short of that what is the point of this so called “reform” then?
Here’s the next question. Will he vote for cloture on debate of a bill that has a public option? My guess is Yes. And that is what his “we don’t have the votes” has been signaling all along.
Might wanna call his staff and ask if this interpretation is correct.
I am guessing Conrad has some mumbo-jumob about too government interference because of a public option. Well, if you want any reform at all, and you have a weak co-op system insrad of public option, that will require many more, and stronger, private insurance market regulations and a maz of subsidies.
Otherwise, what we will get is some extension of care, with more of a very inefficient medical provision and finance system, and repeated, and outrageous, walletectomies of ordinary folk.
But I guess that is OK. I guess the private insurers are such weak and delicate flowers that they cannot stand any public competition at all, unlike Fed-Ex and UPS.
I can think of one point of this reform. Seeing if folks will get working and drive single-payer through the House if they don’t like the public option. Obama’s folks apparently are saying that the public will not put the pressure on to get single-payer. Well, are they right or will enough single-payer people get busy to mobilize the immense support required to shove a public option through?
But a number of the folks who are nay-sayers on single-payer also maintained that Obama couldn’t win the election.
We will see by the end of the year.
Why doesn’t Obama just use the bully pulpit and solve all the problems?!/11?!?1!?
Couldn’t get the link Elliott. This one?
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6824
yeah, that’s it, sry!
Evil MSM MSNBC just reported from the LA Forum.
Looks like a presidential town hall meeting in Minot might be in order.
why not
How much money has conrad taken from the health care industry? That’s the fact that makes decisions for me. Anybody know?
In view of known prejudices that are thriving on Senator Baucus led U.S.Senate Committee of Six–with the minimal census based population(minimal urban population as well) these six Americans represent–the money and lobbyist politics are very powerful when driven by for profit insurers or other big healthcare players who are protecting profits.
Voter push back/blowback for Baucus from sparsely rural populated Montana if he has a K Street loaded up war chest for re-election makes trying to take him out a pure climb the mountain undertaking.
Is this about true reform/cost control? If so then Single Payer is the true and only real start line.
This more and more does not smell like true reform–smells more like profits preservation–the co-op idea is weak–why is weak being pushed?
Just in case anyone is wondering where the tow hall protesters learned their manners.
Watch this clip and pass it on.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2540
It’s no wonder the Dems have no message control here–they can’t really seem to agree on what they’re even trying to do. They want “reform”, but there seems to be no consensus on what that means. Public option? Single payer? Universal coverage? No penalty for pre-existing conditions? Everyone seems to want something different. I can’t even figure out what Obama is trying to pass. I just know he doesn’t want to kill my grandmother. Okay, but what DO you want to do?
See my #8.
Interesting analysis of the “public option” section of HELP committee mark-up-
The Senate HELP Committee “public option” will be multiple “options,” and these will be run by insurance companies
truly shocking :)
Here is What Paul Krugman has to say for all this Bipartisanship Bullshit:
He calls it a Republican Death Trip
Thanks. Following the
moneybribes is always illuminating.Hannity is such a charmer. It is doubtful that I would have been able to maintain my cool under such circumstances.
Fucking dirtbag.
Why don’t we have Specter go around and spank Kent Conrad and everyone on behalf of health care? He’ll do anything to get reelected.
spank his monkey is more like it
There’s a thought.
I knew that was a meatball right down the middle and you’re just the guy to knock it out of the park! *g*
I think that what Krugman misses is that the big reason Republicans are willing to lie through their teeth is that there’s absolutely no penalty for doing so. Sarah Palin can say that Obama’s death panels what to snuff her son, because the MSM will not come out and say: “Look, she’s either bat shit crazy or she’s flat-out lying. Or both.” What’s worse, even the Dems won’t say it. Instead, they’re either “outraged” or they “blast” her or they say she’s being “misleading”, which leaves me with the impression that maybe the death panel is just going to rough Trig up a little. If the Dems aren’t willing to call bullshit when they’re up to your eyeballs in cow patties, then I’m just going to tune them out and wait for Jon Stewart to do it for them. Kudos to Krugman for at least doing it on the op-ed pages.
I can resist anything but temptation!
Great. Insult the whole state, while you’re at it.
If that’s the level at which you can discuss, maybe you DON’T actually need to post?
Stewart and Colbert are the most reliable sources (in the MSM) for good information right now. (I can already hear the MSM windbags discounting such a notion. “They’re just a comedy show.”) Yeah, right.
Any comments or questions, Howie, you punk-ass little bitch excuse of a “news critic?”
I went ahead and sugar-coated my sentiment.
I just watched Clinton’s address to the NN on C-SPAN. Interesting remarks. If I understood him correctly, he said that bloggers were doing some of the best work in journalism right now. Of course we already knew that, but it’s nice to see a public acknowledgment from a power guy like him.
After watching the town hall and then reading about Conrad, I’m beginning to have a little bit more sympathy for Baucus.
Add Bill Nelson from Florida to this list.
Damn, drums along the Mowhawk up in here.
I called Sen Conrad.
Informed them Blue Crosss Blue Shield (BCBS) used to be a non-profit, and it failed to keep costs under control, and asked why coops would work now?
Informed his staff that Sen Cnrad was either mis-informed or bought off. Asked which it was. They said they’d call back.
“They said they’d call back.”
I hope you’re not holding your breath.
A US Senator “misinformed or bought off”? I can’t believe such a thing. They’re public servants.
Their actions are neither public, nor do they serve.
I’m feeling screwed. I though I’d spread it around by asking unpleasant questions.
Unpleasant questions are always good, the more, the merrier.
There are multiple bills. There is no bill from the Baucus committee and not likely to be one. The drive for healthcare reform will come from the House. If single-payer is to happen, its advocates will have to convince 15 Blue Dogs and all of the remaining Democrats to vote Yea on the Weiner substitute amendment to HR 3200. That amendment guts the text of HR 3200 and replaces it with the text of HR 676, the Conyers single-payer bill.
The question I raise is whether single-payer advocates are going to hit the phones, activate their personal networks, and start moving some votes in the House (and yes, it is damn hard; ask Jane Hamsher). Or are single-payer advocates just going to sit on their hands and carp about Baucus.
Sen. Baucus is toast. Should the “exempt tax status” of insurers be exposed, for what is it, a huge corporate subsidy, taxpayer would be irate. Yet no one speaks of tax law and tax status of “corporations” which are considered public charities for tax law purposes? What is
charitableabout BCBS, when coverage is denied and then that person dies????????agreed, it never ceases to amaze me that a flagrant jackass elected by a state that represents .002 percent of this country’s population could obstruct health care reform for those that need it. He needs to be challenged in the next primary along with Baucus.
The Democratic Party has been winning elections–at least the last two–also has plenty of leaders–this party–these people–put healthcare reform on the agenda during 2008.
Not the Republicans. The Republicans basically are for doing nothing or so little that nothing still is the Republican goal.
So Barack Obama won the WH–this is his WH and this is his healthcare reform.
Senator Baucus? He evidently is behind one Democratic Party steering wheel and he is driving some part of this reform.
Senator Conrad? Pushing this co-op “idea” is positive how again for any real Democratic Party interest in healthcare reform and true cost control?
President Obama did not have to do this in 2009–looking more and more like this WH should have waited until after 2010 elections because ending up in the ditch on healthcare reform–crawling out of the ditch with this loser co-op “public option”–poorly understood as it is and remains–is only giving the Republicans a fat target for 2010 GOP Lie-a-thon.
A failed “top decked” reform brought to Americans by Democratic Party and the Obama WH seems quite pointless. I can vote people in–send money–call and email but I am not President of the United States. The guy who is wanted the job and now better get it done or 2012 may be at the end–not the middle.
“…he would not vote for a government-run health care program”.
WHAT government-run health care program?
Christy quotes Sen. Conrad:
A public option plan would also be not-for-profit and would be detatched from government to be run by professional administrators (like any other insurance plan).
Those aren’t valid nits of his. If he has a disagreement it must be with the idea of a national plan as opposed to state/regional.
BTW, does N. Dakota now have big national insurance company headquarters?
The main abstract goals:
Lower costs to individuals and the nation.
Cover everybody.
Improve care quality.
Offer people more & better choices for insurance.
A few ways to get there:
Filled Medicare Part D donut with assistance from private industry.
The public option to help people the private insurers don’t want and for choice
More Information Technology (computers) to lower cost and reduce errors
Regulate private insurers to prevent pre-existing-conditions and recissions junk
Offer an ‘exchange’ where people can shop more easily for insurance.
Subsidize some people so more people covered and to get better preventive care
Quality/effectiveness of medical treatments study & analysis
Those are the high points.
like Medicare, Medicaid or the VA?
Uh, is it possible he meant he wouldn’t vote for a government-owned & run hospital system? A gov’t established public option INSURANCE plan is something else.
Tricky wording to parse.
We are seeing a Kabuki dance around this pre-determined outcome: we will get a largely Republican, insurance company friendly overhaul with a public option fig leaf. The Conrads will be able to say “no it is not a public option”, and the liberals will be able to say it is.
If the bill does include real reform of unethical insurance practices, and offers the prospect of extending coverage to tens of millions of the uninsured, then it will be progress and worth taking.
Koppelman at Salon says it isn’t true, that it’s a sort of semantic misunderstanding. The paper hasn’t published a retraction tho & they have a Saturday edition.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com