A weak public option...

[SHRED]

...would do nothing to contain cost.

It must be strong and available to anyone and everyone to be affective.

Agree?


----

[rudy23]

1. Not only would it be ineffective, but its failure would provide ammo to the right.

We'd be further in the hole than we are now. Once the R's scrapped the weak public option, we would have to argue for a stronger one in the wake of the weak PO's failure. Well take a wild guess at how the freepers and corporate media would spin that one?

Kinda the way they spun the financial crisis as the fault of government regulation?

[slipslidingaway]

2. Agree n/t

[daleanime]

3. If we get no PO...

or a capped and limited one, I would rather any health care bill be voted down:banghead:

[Kermitt Gribble]

4. Agree. n/t

[damntexdem]

5. It would be worse than useless.

We need a robust PO available to all.

[bvar22]

6. Worse than useless.

It would stop real Health Care Reform for another generation.
Call me cynical, but I believe that IS The Plan.

ALL of the Public Options currently on the table are less than WEAK, even the lauded HR 3200.
Obama was correct when, in a mistaken moment of TRUTH, he called The Public Option a "thin sliver" which is being whittled away as we speak.

The ill-defined Public Option is nothing more than a few crumbs the peasants are being allowed to beg for, while channeling $BILLIONS to the For Profit Health Insurance Industry that gets the RICH plum of FORCING every American to BUY their product.

The "Public Option" is a "please don't throw me in the brier patch" alternative for the For Profit Health Insurance Industry.
AND the "Centrist" Democratic Party has done a GREAT job of selling it for them.

[jtrockville]

7. Worse than nothing.