Tweet
Well surprise, surprise. In a meeting over the future of the health care bill, Pelosi asks the progressives to suck it up:
In an interview with me, Dem Rep. Raul Grijalva described the scene in frustrated tones. He said House leaders acknowledged the popularity within the Dem caucus of the robust public option, but asked them to consider a public option where reimbursment rates are negotiated individually with providers. That’s a solution Blue Dogs favor but liberals reject.
“Unfortunately, the discussion was about negotiated rates,” Grijalva told me. “We continue to be very much opposed to that.”
Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer left the meeting, Grijalva said, but “frustrated” House liberals gave an earful to remaining Dem leaders, such as Jim Cyburn, Charlie Rangel and Henry Waxman.
“Why are we still in this discussion about negotiated rates? We went out and counted heads, and the vast majority supports Medicare plus five,” House liberals said to leadership, according to Grijalva. That’s a reference to the whip count by House progressives finding that 180 House Dems support of a robust public option.
When I pointed out to Grijalva that the robust public option doesn’t quite have the votes to pass a public option, he rejoined: “Neither do negotiated rates…This puts progressives in an untenable position.” Another meeting is set for tomorrow. Stay tuned…
Let’s recap:
- Progressives have to suck up tax credits in the stimulus bill that did no good because Grassley, who didn’t vote for the bill, wanted them
- Progressives have to suck it up and vote for war funding they pledged to vote against so Blue Dogs will have cover voting for the $108 billion European bank bailout that progressives don’t want either
- Progressives have to suck it up and give the Blue Dogs everything they want on the big coal bailout bill, then vote for it because the Blue Dogs don’t want to
- Progressives have to suck it up and give in to Mike Ross after he holds the health care bill "hostage" for 10 days, claiming his cuts will make the bill more "fiscally responsible." CBO later tells Pelosi that Ross’s changes on Medicare rates add $85 billion in costs to the bill.
The overwhelming majority of the American public, not to mention the Democratic party, favor the creation of a strong public plan. (And according to Nate Silver, a majority of Blue Dog districts favor a public option too.) Pelosi hasn’t done shit to twist the Blue Dog arms, she’s going to the well once again and telling the progressives they have to — yes — suck it up.
Look, sixty Democrats said they would vote against any bill that didn’t have a public option tied to Medicare rates. Supporters subsequently donated over $400,000 to thank them for it. If that isn’t a ringing endorsement, I don’t know what is.
It’s time for them to make good on that promise.
81 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
This is so frustrating. There is no representation going on here from the “leadership”. What will it take to get Nancy Pelosi, et. al., to start working for reform?
Maybe when the public option’s supporters discover that they are not eligible for any version of the public option being discussed in Congress?
Maybe when these same peasants discover that the legislation that they’ve been fighting for, a bill that would make Medicare-like coverage available to all Americans (for any price), isn’t even on the table?
Think that’ll wake someone up?
Do you really think anyone around here wouldn’t prefer single payer?
not sure, but i think the point above is that there is some confusion about public option policy-wise.
I have two local Democratic meetings coming up. I wonder how much trouble I should try to instigate.
Jane I love you, but not in a creepy stalker kind of way. I guess I better go cut the grass.
Think everyone here has the same definition/understanding of a public option? Hell, even Howard Dean’s PO pitch is completely unlike what’s outlined in HR 3200.
The question is: should you accept a vague, anemic public option instead of single-payer simply because a group of people who would prefer to give you nothing are willing to throw you a piece of shit?
Terrific summary.
Why do the progressives continue to have to do all of the Congressional and policy ‘heavy lifting’ all by themselves?
It says a lot about the level of corruption in the status quo that the progressives have to work this hard to try and clear away at least some of the deadwood policies that continue to weigh us down.
Considering FDL has been working so hard to pressure the CPC to whip its members in support of the PO, I’d say @2 is a troll. I shouldn’t have fed it.
well, whipping the cpc in order to create a progressive block is political strategy (and i think it’s brilliant strategy), but it’s not policy analysis. policy-wise, i do think there is big confusion re what the po is, what is robust, how it will work, will it work as advertised, etc. and i also agree that dr. dean’s statements have not been, um, consistent with any legislation i’m aware of. but dean is not alone in doing that — which tells me there are lots of people confused. maybe that has changed recently? i don’t follow the polling carefully, so maybe there’s been a change, but nate silver posted on this about 6 weeks ago: Poll: Most Don’t Know What “Public Option” Is — Including Pollsters.
however, the post is about pelosi and the leadership vs grijalva and the progressives…
I took the comment @2 differently. Sure there is confusion about the definition of the PO, a robust PO, etc., That’s fair. But those of us who are working to get some form of decent reform don’t need to be insulted. Just sayin.
Neuter Those Fucking Blue Bitches!
(this comment was in no way intended to be sexist for those hypersensitive to Jersey colloquialisms)
I can’t believe I am saying this but I actually think doing nothing would be better than doing what the leaderless congress is about to do to us. How many more ways do they think they can completely screw us before people are bankrupted in droves.
Keith and his “Special Comment” is on MSNBC>
If you’re the progressivs you need to tell her that if she doesn’t start beating up the blue dogs, the progressives will field a candidate against her for the Speakership. Neither Obama, nor Harry Reid, nor the blue dogs can defend her against a competitor from the progressive side. The blue dogs don’t have the votes to protect her. Progressives, it’s time to get down to business and to say to the Leaders that if they won’t act like Democrats, they won’t be leaders anymore.
KO is beating down everyone, and talking to you, me, and Obama.
If the House of Lords has a positive purpose I suppose they can listen as well.
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
This is the moment when all your hard work and the targeted resources you’ve been able to spend pay off…in the House of Representatives! Pelosi ain’t stupid, she will try what has worked in the past but if the progressives hold firm, she will cave because she knows that no bill or a bad bill means her job either after January or in 2011. This is hardball now and it’s bein done out in the open…Pelosi will hafta choose between Rahm and her job and the only way she can beat Rahm once and for all is to fuck ‘im in the ass with a strong public option.
i am not surprised by this in the least. not the least.
And as much as I am disgusted, I have to admit one tiny little thing: one of the only rays of sunshine (for me) that comes out of this debacle, should a robust public option fail, will be rubbing it in the face of the cheerleaders. There a quite a few people at big orange that I am thoroughly lookign forward to ridiculing.
that said this development is infuriating, and I will be making quite a few phone calls tomorrow to whip my reps into line, for all the good it will do.
The ball is totally in the progressive block’s court.
If they can hold strong, and the WH wants a bill badly enough, we’ll get a robust PO.
If the block crumbles, we get the United States of AHIP, more and incessant war, and so forth.
Pressure and praise on the progressives, derision and shame on the Blue Dogs and Republicans are the only thing worth doing right now.
“ORDER OF THE SHRILL” GOES TO JANE!
ORDER OF THE SHRILL
Never heard that one. I think I like it..)
Not to worry. They’ll fix it in conference.
(I’ll include the /s since tempers seem to be fraying.)
No matter how it turns out we progressives must hold on and together and continue to advocate. It I think does make a difference. I certainly know to not keep on speaking truth to power and each other dashes all hope. Personally I think so much time haggling is educating and empowering many not usually political and there will be unrest if what is obviously needed is not forthcoming.
As an aside, I some months ago abandoned my position as a committee member of my local Dem Party in protest of the dominance of blue dog thinking. I have a few companions and we continue to do what we can keeping the liberal flame burning.
By the way, here’s a Minneapolis StarTribune report on co-ops. Synopsis: They could work in a perfect world, but not the way the Senate bill has them set up:
Which, considering that health care costs are the main reason Americans want reform, tells you right off the bat that even “successful” co-ops are a failure at reining in skyrocketing health care costs.
But it gets worse:
Exactly. They’ll fail, and Americans will be back to square one. But the insurance companies will be richer, thanks to the mandates.
Krugman was called “SHRILL” about his economic warnings.
Rahm’s “fucking stupid” comment was aimed at the progressives AND their supporters/whippers, aka Jane.
I think it’s totally a badge of honor.
Maybe it should be “TEH ORDER OF THE FUCKING SHRILL!!!1!1″
dude! must read the history of the Ancient, Hermetic, and Occult Order of the Shrill. and, of course, there is the shrillblog.
this, i think, will make you smile.
yeah, the peasants thing was imo out of line. agree completely.
TOTALLY!!!
KO is really blasting through the BS. His comment is going on and on.
it will till the end of his show… guess he feels strongly about health care!!!
THey announced yesterday that the comment would be the entire show.
As usual, you are quite thorough!
And re-reading makes me smile again too.
More on the poll showing most people are clueless about what “the” public option is here.
And as long as I’m diary-whoring, folks may want to look at the piece I just put up at the Sperm Bank regarding a potential break for preserving the state single-payer waiver amendment to HR 3200, which passed in one committee but faces potential torpedoing by Pelosi and Hoyer.
Thanks
Most of the money spent on heath care is in the last 6 months of life something like 90%.
Norske I left you some comments last thread
and your point is??? maybe not spend the money? it is for the family and patient ..
the dates were kind of a surprise… reminds me how long we’ve been reading blogs. my how the time has flown!
Will my people fight for whats right Jane? Or is this Mexico when my grandparents left?
oh, i’m an idiot and my memory is not what it was. i forgot your most excellent post, 63% of Americans Can’t Pick the Public Option Out of a Three-Suspect Lineup.
please folks, don’t let my stupidity let you miss that one.
… and now i’m off to read the latest… thanks!
so it was all posturing from pelosi after all. mark it down and remember it.
The vast majority of my people favor this please get them awake on spanish tv and radio if you would Jane.
You’re assuming that the “robust” public option is “good.” I would like to know why the current estimate of the robust public option is estimated to save 10% over private health insurance. Doesn’t that seem a tad low? Don’t we already spend more then 2-3 times per capita over better health plans in Europe? This might be reform but it’s only baby steps.
STOP PRESS:
Congress does not need permission from health insurers before it can write laws that regulate them. The president can enforce those laws, and write regulations to tailor them to fit circumstances, without getting a note from the insurers that it’s OK with them.
That may be news to Congress, but not to anyone not on lobbyist-life-support.
Have the Democrats forgotten how to govern. Or are they simply governing for the lobbyists who made them?
1
A challenge to her job on this
“How can we not be united against Death?”
- KO special comment
Let them make the trouble on tape got a friend?
option b
Truth of what is at stake Thank you Keith for sharing.. and caring..
Woahh. Maddow reporting that D leadership is saying removal of chairmanship from anyone that sides with R’s on a filly-buster.
First good news in…gosh I guess since Obama was elected or sworn in…
KO and Maddow are slicing and dicing…and FDL is chopping.
Why isn’t Obama on the phone to Pelosi telling her WHAT’S UP? She needs to hear from the White House ASAP. Notice how Obama’s poll numbers go up when he ACTUALLY goes to bat for the people that elected him?
Baby steps is exactly what a PO will be. I agree. I’m counting on the possibility that it will screw insurance companies into oblivion and the popularity of that will allow further change.
Our county D’s can be occassionally effective. The State D’s are totally worthless. They cannot or do not want to run any type of real campaign. I want to raise trouble about ************ but do not tell anyone what I said.
we’re scraping and clawing for not much – just so people aren’t expecting a significant improvement on the status quo, which lest I remind you, sucks.
Citizen ThingsComeUndone:
Check out the last thread…I responded…Peace, Brother.
Ooooh, that the fix is in is either very good news or very bad news. Taken with Pelosi’s buy-off, I would advise one not to count their chickens before they’re hatched, lest they come up turkeys.
money for nothing, and their health care for free.
I’m with you on that. It’s a scrap, but it’s a scrap that will save some lives.
We are scraping and clawing to get a foot in the door so that people can choose; if the door is slammed shut there is no possibility of evolving it in the future. We are trying to hold the line for the least bad solution.
Then we will have to scrape and claw over the next four years to get that expanded to truly universal coverage and to open it up so all people get to choose between a private plan and a public plan.
But even if we win this battle, we will have to scrape and claw to make sure that the regulations don’t give back to the insurance companies the competition that we’ve fought hard to get.
If there is a level playing field with Medicare plus 5% rates for the public plan, then the ability of insurance companies to actually compete in that environment determines in the long term whether the public plan covers more and more people and becomes a de facto single-payer plan. And we will have to fight changes in legislation that try to privilege private plans over the public plan.
If the Democrats sell out, they will be punished in 2010; and they don’t seem to care; maybe it’s the lobbying jobs available for non-reelected politicians.
And don’t get tired. Healthcare is just the first battle to fight. Climate change, financial industry reform, and Employee Free Choice Act are going to be the same scraping and clawing. So put Congress on your speed-dial.
Am I epu’d? Just got off the phone and skimmed through – among the bits of news on the phone (the ex and I are working out retirement in divorce) is that ex’s coompany is pushing employees to sign up for the “Premium” health insurance – $5000 deductible, some kind of “medical savings account” to contribute to….The “Silver” plan has a much lower deductible but costs $130/mo for single employee – compared to $0 for employee currently.
I am slack-jawed with amazement and disappointment as to what Baucus-care’s individual-buying-insurance cost to the individual.
Last I heard, subsidies would only go to those at 200% (200%) of poverty – level – which is a measure waaaay out of date, anyway…
I’m now convinced the president does NOT want a good public option, that he wants whatever will let him say he passed a bill, no matter how lousy, and he wants to give the insurance companies what they want.
I’m so disappointed and discouraged I can hardly lift my head.
Trying to steel myself to make calls to WH and Fin Comm members tomorrow, but truly, it seems so futile. At best, 1/2 step forward and 3 steps back.
I can’t think of a punishment horrible enough for Max Baucus. He should at the least register as the Republican he is. That’s all for now.
It’ll wake them up, alright. The problem is they’ll either stay home or vote Republican next time.
oh, if only there was some way to hold Pelosi, ummm what is that word … oh yeah, accountable! for these typical, consistent and predictable betrayals of her ever faithful, long-suffering base.
the only conceivable way to do it would be to find a rich, ambitious charismatic, and Progressive mid-level Democratic party functionary in the Bay area who wants to lay it all on the line – his career in the Party, his fundraising network – by challenging the sitting Speaker of the House, the 10 term incumbent Nancy Pelosi. What could go wrong? Once such a candidate is found, Accountability Now will have their back, helping them raise the millions of dollars needed for a challenge within the Party primary system. easy, sneezy.
As for attempting to bring accountability by supporting the high-name-recognition challenger from 2008, who got 17% of the vote, no way! that person did not run as a Democrat! Indeed, she had a few choice words for the Democratic Party, words that (D) leaders in Washington continue to validate day-in, day-out.
If you think that route is comparably practical to the primary scenario, well, make sure you direct your donations and volunteerism elsewhere, because Accountability Now!, while still a very laudable group, has taken 3rd Party and (I) accountability “off the table” in order to concentrate on primary challengers:
They may pick off some low hanging fruit that way – I really hope they do – but for the rest of you, please continue to vote (D), no matter what!
No, no, a thousand times, no!
A bit graphic Norske, but I agree that Nancy Pelosi will cave if the progressives stand firm. They just have to keep remembering that many of them are in safe districts, so she has more to lose than they do.
Pelosi trying to peel off progressives? Seriously you could tell time by these anticks. They are so expectable.
Perhaps because it’s not robust?
That was true for Clinton too. But he didn’t catch on and keep after that Health Care Reform bill. Wonder if Obama’s got the point yet.
KO Special Comment was heart wrenching! I was in tears way before it ended and really pissed off. These weekly clinics will be great and an embarrassment to every one of these stupid ass blue dogs. I hope they get a saturation of coverage. It’s time to start really kicking their asses. WORK IT KO! BUST THEIR FUCKING HEADS WITH THIS!
Without a full and robust public option, the insurance companies will not reduce their rates. It should be public option or nothing!
We started out with compromise. But the CBO report on the Baucus bill (he will forever be tied to his deeds) looks like the senate can pass this disaster on reconciliation. So Pelosi needs to shut up already or else we need single payer that will really save us all money–just not give the insurance companies their billions in profits. Now take your pick. The House needs to stand strong for what their committees have already passed.
When progressives raise $40,000,000 the old guard might take notice
I’ll believe that one when it happens.
I think I’m going to start sharpening the tines on my pitchfork, too. Just in case I have to use it, you understand.
Remember that item a few months ago about some insurance lobbyist ( I think his name was Elmendorf or something) who was hosting an affair at his house for Pelosi? What can we do about this shrew? She’s from San Francisco for cryin’ out loud.
A public option is the insurer organization set up by the gov’t and run as a not-for-profit. What makes it ‘robust’?
The payment formula issue?
I don’t know enough about the economics of hospitals and so on. Kent Conrad seemed to think some of them would be hurt severely if the Rockefeller amend. went through. If there’s truth in that then why do any doctors & hospitals around the country accept Medicare-style funding?
In general I’m in favor of simply paying a bill at the negotiated rate. I think that reducing the payout by a formula only encourages them to increase their prices to ensure that in the end they still get what they want. I prefer simplicity and the lower numbers that would likely produce.
So, what exactly is robust? It must be the system which reduces prices best. Which approach reduces prices and final cost to everyone the most? Is it forced Medicare-style formula which providers can get around or is it simply paying what’s negotiated.
It’s not entirely obvious or easily decided, but I tend to go with free market negotiated rates.
I suppose one potential catch in that is whether it’s an individual or a large group negotiating those prices. The PO is a large group, but does it negotiate that way?
agreed. and i didn’t mean to imply that i disagreed with jane’s approach to this, and supporting the progressives in congress. and holy crap, pelosi is horrible (as is the white house and reid). all the dem leadership needs to go.
11 = Win
16 – a close second
The Medicare+5% Public Option is called “robust” because it is the only one that could actually work. The vast majority of medical offices can thrive on Medicare+5% rates. It pays the same regardless of the doctor’s cash price, so they can’t game it by raising their prices.
The negotiated rates idea is something politicians came up with as a compromise for political purposes. The CBO scored it as saving $2.5 billion a year, which is probably within the margin of error of nothing. Health care providers would have little incentive to negotiate. It might help a little in states that have a single private company, but mostly it would just limp along.
When do I get my third party?
I was kinda disappointed with the end of Keith’s comment into shaming the un-shame-able. How is a line of hundreds of people going to convince politicians already bought and paid for by big business? He believe’s a boycott/strike would result in more deaths or people dying because in retaliation insurance companies will then not approve coverage.
When it was reported how they deny coverage, that went largely under the radar and explained away by the insurance companies as simply errors when filling out forms.
Its just another tactic to deny and delay care, they rather you die if it cost them enough money. With millions of couples everyday getting married and many of those then having children, they know you’re replaceable on the rolls.
The confusion behind Public Option is because it was never easily explained, it was vague and it has no emotion tied too it.
We are largely fighting with ourselves now, not the Republicans, they are no longer a factor. They won’t vote for it and we shouldn’t have to weaken any bill further just for one token Republican vote. We’ll get Bi-Partisanship once Republican Party rejects its Neo-Conservative leadership. That won’t happen until they experience more defeat and a total rejection of their ideas outside their strong holds.
Nobody has bothered to explain what the Pubic Option is and they keep coming up with these numbers short of 100% coverage, how is that acceptable? Isn’t that a form of discrimination? You make too much money, you can’t opt into the Public Plan??? Isn’t that class warfare?
They ask J. Hacker vague questions. Only GriTV has explained it, but I already know what the keys are. His plan assumes All In, including Medicare and S-Chip, pre-population is the key to getting the prices you want.
It seems the leadership is bent on covering only half or so of the 47-50 million (including myself) without in coverage. This will not work, because roughly 10 million will still not have access to the Public Option, but will still be forced to buy shitty insurance.
In a few years, some say around 2016 it will be deemed a failure and there will be pressure to wind it down or make changes.
Key elements of the current House Bill and now possibly the joke of a Senate bill is allowing States to opt out of the Federal plan for one of their own.
Looks like PA and CA are poised to Single Payer.
This is our only hope unless theirs some 11th hour enlightenment and during the vote for the House bill, the add-in for Single Payer (replacing the wording in HR3200) with Medicare For All and DARE the Senate not to agree to those terms, not allow for a Fillibuster and let the those with weak hearts allow it to pass with 50+Biden
Its not over but the clock is running…
In the US?
Ron Paul is that front runner but he dives off into lulu land with some of his rants about entitlements.
If you want radical change it won’t happen without any bloodshed unfortunately.
You want real change?
If 80% of the workforce doesn’t go to work, doesn’t buy food or gas for a week, pulls all their money out of the 4 largest banks and don’t pay your health care premiums, you might actually see something happen.
Boycotts and Strikes only work if you can hit big business hard in the wallet.
Was in the hospital a couple of days ago. One of the occupants in my room was a frail 94 year old lady who was going to have some veins reamed out to improve circulation in her legs. As I understand it, its a nasty operation in the best of circumstances. She most likely will spend her last days in lots of pain. She would be a good candidate for one of those “death committees”. The last I saw of her they were wheeling her out for the operation.
Good morning all you indefatigable Fire Dog Pups.
This is is my first post and I am confused!
What gives with Pelosi? She seems to run hot and cold! I was of the impression that she was going to support a strong public option, Medicare +5%. Did I just misunderstand all along?