Rockefeller, Weiner open to public option with opt out clause

[ProSense]

Rockefeller Warms To Public Option Opt Out; So Do Conservative Dems

Brian Beutler

Earlier today, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) told me something somewhat unexpected. "I'm looking very much now at this opt out public option," he said, "not opt in but opt out--so you start out with a public option, and if you don't like it you can opt out....that has a sense of freedom."

Why unexpected? Because here's what he told me just last week: "I don't start out favoring that," he said. "You know, opt out is sort of like trigger. It sounds good, it makes people feel good, but the question is, Is it good? And I don't think it really is. If it's the only way you can get the votes, then that's a decision that will have to be made over my head."

That's a pretty notable change, and reflective of the political appeal of the opt-out proposal within the Democratic party. Rockefeller and other senators have come to believe that, in addition to being more likely to get the votes needed to pass in the Senate, it's also a policy fix that will have almost, if not the same, impact as a fully national public option.

This afternoon, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY)--a very visible public option advocate--said he could back an opt-out clause. "I would accept and would be open to the idea, after the program's up and running a couple years, if a state wants to opt out, if they want to leave 25, 30, 50 thousand of their citizens without that choice," Weiner said. "I dont believe it's gonna happen. So i would accept that kind of an opt-out thing." Rockefeller likewise believes that, once consumers purchase in to the public option, they'll raise hell if their state governments try to take it away from them.

more

[MoJoWorkin]

1. I wonder why no one wants to comment on this?

[jenmito]

2. I have a feeling that will be the final "compromise." I like it because Howard Dean likes it

enough that he'd vote for it. And whichever states opt out could have politicians in serious trouble.

[MoJoWorkin]

3. It may be a workable plan---just might get enough people on board in the Senate

[jenmito]

6. I agree. n/t

[Beetwasher]

14. I Actually Like The Opt Out Even If It WASN'T A So-Called Compromise Position

It's brilliant politics. I think I would want it in no matter what the more that I think about it.

[jenmito]

17. I agree...

it would REALLY hurt the politicians who went against their constituents which is why they probably wouldn't opt out in the first place.

[Cha]

22. Seems brilliant to me..

kinda like a catch 22 for the reprigs.

[joeycola]

15. Its the people in those states that will suffer and Dean knows that but yet

he is favorable to it. How fall he has fallen from his ideals.

[jenmito]

16. The people will only suffer if their state DOES opt out which is unlikely...

especially if the majority of the people in that state WANT the PO.

[jenmito]

18. Hey-didn't you tell me to "Have a good day" earlier? I guess that was your way of

getting out of replying to my post. :hi:

[joeycola]

20. yes, I did. We were going nowhere with that string. But as

far as opting out, there may be a few states. We will see.

[annabanana]

4. This plan will only function the way we want it to IF

1) Benefits roll out quickly

and

2) Those idiot Repig "leaders" who opted out get squashed.

[Rosco T.]

5. Don't Fear the Opt-Out...

it will be a sword over every 'thuggie head...

[Arkana]

10. It happens to be the right thing to do--AND politically advantageous.

A rare two-fer.

[drm604]

7. That fourth paragraph caught my attention.

"I would accept and would be open to the idea, after the program's up and running a couple years, if a state wants to opt out, if they want to leave 25, 30, 50 thousand of their citizens without that choice," Weiner said.

If it's true that they wouldn't be able to opt-out until the program has been up and running for a couple of years, then I could back this. It would be very difficult to tell your constituents "all right, times up, we're taking it away now!"

[vaberella]

11. So what if it' immediate.

People have families that live in other states. Things also spread by word of mouth. Let's say Pennsylvania has one family and Texas another. Penn gots PO and Texas Opt-out when Penn family says I'm saving more money I have no lines and i haven't seen rationed care. While Texas family is likie it's socialism dammnit. But then they're paying through the nose. IN the end, socialism will win out because they'll see they were wrong.

[Clio the Leo]

8. Esp. after hearing Mr. Weiner's comments, I am more and more convinced...

.... that this is the way they'll go.

Has ANYONE in the Congress come out against this idea? The only negative responses I've seen to it are ..... ya know ..... here. :)

[Arkana]

9. They like it because no one will opt out.

GOP governors will talk a big game, but their people will revolt if the closest thing to universal health care we've ever had gets through the Senate and House, the President signs it, and they opt out because they want to be pissy little babies.

[ProSense]

12. Exactly. n/t

[hileeopnyn8d]

19. Exactly

The GOP governors will make a big national show of opposition, while they quietly go around their state with whatever the public option equivalent is to Bobby Jindal's giant stimulus checks and take all the credit.

[sofa king]

21. Except the suckers.

And because these particular suckers follow a marketing dogma endorsed by such health visionaries as Rush Limbaugh, they are probably more likely to suffer from health complications. So if the 23% of Americans who are right-wing tools all opt out, the system as a whole will probably benefit from their absence.

[Beetwasher]

13. Awesome! Me Likey!

Strong PO w/ Opt Out. Works for me!