NYT: Public option all but dead

posted at 12:00 pm on September 13, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Most analysts expected Barack Obama to back away from the public option in his speech to Congress on Wednesday evening.  However, the president surprised them by strongly endorsing — but not quite demanding — the inclusion of a government-run health-insurance plan in the final version of ObamaCare.  The progressive wing of the Democratic Party cheered Obama, but the New York Times reports that it may have been the last gasp of a program that has drawn the ire of everyone else:

It was just one line in a campaign manifesto, and it hardly seemed the most significant or contentious. As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama said he would “establish a new public insurance program” alongside private health care plans.

That proposal took on a life of its own, but it now appears to be dying, a victim of an ineffectual White House strategy, the president’s failure to argue passionately for the “public option” and all-out opposition by the insurance industry and much of the health care industry.

In the campaign, Mr. Obama said the public plan would compete with private insurers on the price and quality of care, thus benefiting consumers. What Mr. Obama did not foresee is that, to some people on the right and the left, it would become the most important issue in the debate over health care, touching off a battle over the role of government in one of the nation’s biggest, fastest-growing industries.

It seems odd to have the Times cast the public option as “just one line” in Obama’s campaign “manifesto”.  Obama himself made a much bigger deal about the public option, demanding it as a necessity through most of the debate, until poll erosion forced the White House to send conflicting signals.  Even leading into the speech, the White House seemed confused about the message, hinting at retreat just days before Obama went back on the offensive for the public option on Wednesday.

In its place will come co-ops, which have the potential for the same kind of problem the public option presents.  The Senate wants to fashion them as hands-off, member-owned co-ops, but one does not need the government to form co-ops anyway.  When government creates the co-ops, it tends to keep them alive on federal funds — as has been seen with electricity co-ops in rural areas formed during the Depression.  They’re bottomless pits for federal subsidies, and some of the same Senators calling for health-care co-ops as an alternative to the public option have demanded investigations into the energy co-ops still feeding off the government teat.

Politically, the loss of the public option is a big, big blow to Obama and his leadership.  It won’t be as bad as not passing any kind of health-care reform bill, but it’s close.  His waffling in August and September won’t erase the memory of his insistence on getting it, and by doubling down on Wednesday, it makes the loss that much worse for his image.  If Obama can’t hold a Congress in which his party holds large majorities, it makes him look radical and weak, neither of which comes as any surprise to his opponents.

Update: Mark Impomeni says it doesn’t help that the White House hinted at the Trojan Horse nature of the public option this week (h/t Allahpundit):

But the bigger story the MSNBC missed with its focus on the Wilson flap is found in the second bullet point sent out by the White House last night.  The Obama Administration inadvertently confirmed that the president’s plan will begin a slow take over of the health care system by the federal government.  How else could this be interpreted?

“Undocumented immigrants would be able to buy insurance in the non-exchange private market, just as they do today. That market will shrink as the exchange takes hold, but it will still exist and will be subject to reforms such as the bans on pre-existing conditions and caps.

In other words, as the federal exchange takes hold, plans not complying with the federal government’s standards will start to disappear.  Eventually, it won’t make any sense for any company to offer health insurance as the federal requirements will make the business of providing health insurance far too expensive, and the premiums far too expensive for the insured.

This is not quite what Mark thinks it means, but it’s still bad.  The exchanges are run by the states under the authority of the federal government, and private insurers will sell plans through them.  The White House statement refers to insurers selling outside the exchanges, which will get more and more difficult to do, especially once the IRS starts enforcing the mandates.  The problem with this arrangement is that the government sets the terms for private insurers, which makes them less competitive, far less innovative, and puts them at the disadvantage one sees when the regulator competes in the market it regulates.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

GOOD!RIP!

canopfor on September 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM

It seems as if the NYT is showing some loyalty to Hillary Clinton here by actually doing their job, otherwise I don’t think they would be weighing in with the actual facts.

sonnyspats1 on September 13, 2009 at 12:09 PM

With the public option dead, will Obama have any interest being president? He doesn’t seem to have much interest fixing the economy or defending this country. Should be start calling him Squatter-in-Chief?

ignorantapathy on September 13, 2009 at 12:10 PM

I don’t believe it’s been dropped. These are some slippery bastards. David Axelrod is theist dangerous man in America

ndulik on September 13, 2009 at 12:11 PM

The most dangerous!

ndulik on September 13, 2009 at 12:12 PM

I thought I had gone koo koo for cocoa puffs today. I saw a clip of Olymipa SnoweJob saying that she is opposed to the public plan. Until I see an actual bill, finalized, I still don’t buy the public option is dead. Never ever trust a Democrat (or the NY Times, but I repeat myself).

angryed on September 13, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Angry right-wing wackos unite!

/

perroviejo on September 13, 2009 at 12:12 PM

NYT: Public option all but dead

We need a stake, hammer, cloves of garlic…

Loxodonta on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

It would seem advisable for the GOP brain trust to be making plans for legislation that will contain and control the co-op option to prevent it from growing into a virus. From everything I’ve heard, the Left is already working out the details of how to morph the co-op into the public plan, and then to a communist-style single payer takeover. So if there’s a mechanism that has to be put in place for that development, there must be a counter mechanism that would make the co-op a limited and highly specialized non-governmental organization, with iron clad restrictions in place to keep it that way.

That would defeat Obama’s attempt at a communist-style health care takeover.

jeff_from_mpls on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

I find it interesting that the NY Times FINALLY got something right, in their description of Obama’s “campaign manifesto”.

Manifesto. Hmm. Wasn’t that something a certain Karl Marx compiled in his off-hours? I thought so. Color me red. Amazing.

bradley11 on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

DON’T YOU BELIEVE IT!

FIGHT UNTIL ITS DEAD!

folks this is like one of those B horror movies where you think the monster is dead only to come back to life for one last scare. Don’t be like the saps in those movies! it aint dead until its DEAD! Aim for the head and pull the trigger until your magazine is empty!

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on September 13, 2009 at 12:14 PM

NYT saying public option is dead? This whole story is a trial balloon. I won’t believe it until it is actually dead. Until then I don’t believe the NYT now or ever!

P.S. why believe them now when they have such a proven bias?(i.e no reporting on Van Jones?)

Rndguy on September 13, 2009 at 12:14 PM

With the public option dead, will Obama have any interest being president? He doesn’t seem to have much interest fixing the economy or defending this country. Should be start calling him Squatter-in-Chief?

ignorantapathy on September 13, 2009 at 12:10 PM

All part of the plan. More people unemployed = more people dependent on govt. Next terror attack that happens will be a crisis that he will take advantage of…like oh I dunno, confiscate all those dangerous guns from people.

angryed on September 13, 2009 at 12:14 PM

Please let’s not fall into the trap of calling it the public option.

It’s the GOVERNMENT option.

Words mean things, as they say.

TXUS on September 13, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Do not trust the Dems or the MSM!!!!

mobydutch on September 13, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Given how huge this bill is, how it seems to keep changing from day to day, and how weaselly the wording is, how are we going to be certain the public option is dead if it passes?

Loxodonta on September 13, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Keep up the pressure to Kill the Bill. The libs are frantically trying to come up with the Trojan Horses that the Olympia Snowes and John McCains will accept which will foist govt. health care on us all eventually. Fight on, patriots, fight on.

Christian Conservative on September 13, 2009 at 12:17 PM

KILL THE BILL!!!

pseudonominus on September 13, 2009 at 12:18 PM

RE: The Public option

That’s not the only problem. It is the government interference in the insurance market.

For example, I want to purchase health insurance that only covers major, catastrophic injury or illness. The same with auto insurance, I only want coverage for liability, not comprehensive (nofault) coverage. Or even self-insured where I carry no insurance, and pay for events out of pocket. The state government prohibits that type of insurance product.

Government regulations should be limited to causality loss reserves requirements, prudent financial management of those reserves, and timely payment of claims with coverage clearly defined in the contract.

Instead we get government regulations that force us to buy government defined coverage that is not economically viable. When you eliminate cash payment from patient to provider, as you know the government must do to make it fair to all regardless of personal wealth, we get the worst possible circumstances; poor medical service at too high a cost with patients demanding the impossible while expecting someone else paying the costs.

Skandia Recluse on September 13, 2009 at 12:18 PM

It’s the GOVERNMENT option.

Words mean things, as they say.

TXUS on September 13, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Very good point.

Loxodonta on September 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM

bradley11 on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

I thought the same thing.

becki51758 on September 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM

jeff_from_mpls on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

Are you mad? GOP? Stop the Prez? He needs some bill you know. He can’t be left twisting in the wind, so the GOP will definitely will come to his aid and help him craft the legislation. To not do so is un-collegial or something.

promachus on September 13, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Public option all but dead

Public option will still be in the bill, don’t trust any of them!

Kill the Bill!!!!

yoda on September 13, 2009 at 12:20 PM

That proposal took on a life of its own, but it now appears to be dying, a victim of an ineffectual White House strategy, the president’s failure to argue passionately for the “public option” and all-out opposition by the insurance industry and much of the health care industry.

Huh? How about the reason he failed was because the people don’t trust, want or need his crappy obamacare.

bloggless on September 13, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Public option all but dead

I will believe it “dead” when it hasn’t passed and Conservatives own the congress and presidency.

farright on September 13, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Hey, look kids, a huge wooden horse to play on until bedtime!

Fletch54 on September 13, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Who warned us about this so called Health Insurance Reform Bill? How many ways will Sarah Palin be vindicated?

Levi Johnson bad example.

Dr Evil on September 13, 2009 at 12:22 PM

I can hardly wait for the IRS to become involved in health care. It’s such a natural fit. BLOODSUCKERS looking after my physical well-being.

GarandFan on September 13, 2009 at 12:23 PM

New York Times – YOU LIE!

(BTW, Wilson says he will not apologize — again — on the House floor. Yes! http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/13/wilson-says-apologize-house-floor-outburst/)

Rational Thought on September 13, 2009 at 12:24 PM

This monstrosity of a bill has many ugly heads to it (public option, co-ops, IRS enforcement, etc). Drive Congress to debate its constitutionality. Then we can rip it out by the roots.

Patrick S on September 13, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Why can’t Obama and Co just pass a law that says

1. Insurance companies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, but they can charge a premium for customers that have them. The premiums cannot be more than 25% higher than what the rate would be without the condition.

2. Insurance companies cannot cancel a policy once enacted, except for failure to pay.

3. If you make under $X a year the govt will give you $Y to buy insurance. Nobody but US citizens and permanent residents will be eligible for the subsidy and proof of citizenship, either in the form of a passport, birth certificate or green card will be required to receive the subsidy.

4. The maximum any lawsuit can pay for malpractice is 25X the average income of the injured party over the past 3 years or $2M whichever is higher.

The law could be written in 10 pages, cost next to nothing ti implement and solve 90% of the problems with health insurance today.

angryed on September 13, 2009 at 12:25 PM

The public option is dead.

Long live the public option.

Think “trigger”.

fogw on September 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Okay I was stymied by “the white screen of death” someone said logout and log back in. I did. Did it work?

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Yes it did. I thought going from hundreds of comments yesterday to only a few this morning was suspicious. There is something up with the site. Logout and log back in if you can’t post.

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Politically, the loss of the public option is a big, big blow to Obama and his leadership.

They don’t care. What they lose in government power by not having Fannie Med they will make up for by squeezing the nuts of the insurance companies through insane regulation that will (as the Traitor-in-CHief laughed about the coal industry) “bankrupt them”.

This whole inane, POS bill (and all versions of it) must be killed. There is no alternative. There are separate pieces that need to be addressed independently and anyone who votes for this 1000+ page monstrosity (including whatever changes are eventually made to it) needs to be buried alive under copies of it.

This is an attempted rape of the Constitution and nothing less. That is the whole intention behind the left’s health care changes (as The Precedent and other traitors have said, over and over) and it needs to be put to sleep.

progressoverpeace on September 13, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Okay I was stymied by “the white screen of death” someone said logout and log back in. I did. Did it work?

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

I had the same prob today. Couldn’t post on main topics, was able to login and then post on headlines thread. Weird.

fogw on September 13, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Think “trigger”.

fogw on September 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Let’s hope the Lone Ranger is on our side. ( :

yoda on September 13, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Abort the bill, save the babies.

fourdeucer on September 13, 2009 at 12:33 PM

What happened with the payoff to criminal organizations in the Stimulus bill is reason enough to stop this Congress from passing any legislation at all. They proved they can’t be trusted.

We need to shut them down somehow. They are using legislation to funnel money to the criminal organizations that put them in power.

I hope we can stop them from doing anything.

We need to be the “Party of Hell No!” Until we can get these criminals sent back to the mafias they came from.

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 12:34 PM

I disagree with you Ed… they would like to have it but Obama just wants something to pass… touting the public option is just moving the goal posts for negotiations…

ninjapirate on September 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Obama told Congress come up with something and I will sign it.In so doing he allowed competing Democrat bills to some to the fore, a left wing version and then a more “moderate” Baucus plan.

rob verdi on September 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM

I dont like Baucus’ plan either….fining folks who dont get health care? bs

becki51758 on September 13, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Public option all but dead

Oh sure it is. Right. Natch.

I know a head fake when I see one.

FlameWarrior on September 13, 2009 at 12:39 PM

blockquote>Public option all but dead

Same wolf, different sheepskin.

Same pig, different lipstick.

Kill and bury this bill.

marybel on September 13, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Slippery sods, aren’t they!

OldEnglish on September 13, 2009 at 12:41 PM

Sweep the leg!

ElectricPhase on September 13, 2009 at 12:42 PM

http://bellalu0.wordpress.com/2009/09/13/citizens-converge-on-washington-d-c-president-flees-to-minnesota/

Yeah who is advising the President? The people he needs to convince were in D.C. yesterday…hearts and minds, this is really basic. If you really want bi partisanship you have to speak to ALL Americans – not just your echo chamber.

Dr Evil on September 13, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Politically, the loss of the public option is a big, big blow to Obama and his leadership presentensy. It won’t be as bad as not passing any kind of health-care reform bill, but it’s close. His waffling in August and September won’t erase the memory of his insistence on getting it, and by doubling down on Wednesday, it makes the loss that much worse for his image. If Obama can’t hold a Congress in which his party holds large majorities, it makes him look radical and weak, neither of which comes as any surprise to his opponents.

It couldn’t be happening to a better guy. If the NYT is publishing this type of ominous warning, then Obama really must’ve got a dead cat type of bounce out of his joint address to Congress where he pretty much drained his political capital account–he’s now empty, and lacks the words to fill it, nor the trust to carry it, nor the power to wield it.

ted c on September 13, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I don’t think I have ever seen anyone fall so far so fast.

Terrye on September 13, 2009 at 12:44 PM

I read that article and couldn’t help but notice that there was absolutely no mention of widespread public opposition to the “public” option. No mention in passing of yesterday’s very large demonstration in DC against The One’s policies.

Stephen Macklin on September 13, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Trojan horse. KILL THE BILL. Just KILL it. Then start over. This time, fix the flaws in the system, instead of exploiting them to blow up the system.

petefrt on September 13, 2009 at 12:50 PM

He had to demand it as a sticking point in the speech or else look weaker than he in reality was in the face of the nation to appease the socialist left which fortunately for the rest of us is still just a segment of the DemonRat Party

Unfortunately for the rest of us little people the majority of the congress is composed of the loony left which hijacked the center left Democratic party year ago. Only now do the little people realize the mistake they made election after election.

larvcom on September 13, 2009 at 12:50 PM

I don’t buy it, they will just rename it something else, such as co-op (Baucus plan) or trigger (Pelosi and others) and get it thru because people are fallin for the lie, that if it is not called public option, it is OK. O’Reilly is paying a big part in pushing this lie that Obama is giving up on the socialized medicine angle and the NY Times of course will help too. LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Will I get sanctioned too?

immigrantchick on September 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Somehow I don’t believe the NYT trying to convince us the Public Option is dead.

Enoxo on September 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM

We need a stake, hammer, cloves of garlic…

Loxodonta on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM

…silver bullets, crucifix…

BuckeyeSam on September 13, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Osama Obama wants only one thing from health care “reform:” he wants the entire health system, from doctors/hospitals to meds and insurance, under the government’s (his) absolute control.

No matter how the various “bills” are weasel-worded, this is the goal.

He is attempting to subvert the Constitution. That’s an impeachable offense.

MrScribbler on September 13, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Keep fighting.

El_Terrible on September 13, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Let’s hope the Lone Ranger is on our side. ( :

yoda on September 13, 2009 at 12:33 PM

As a youngster I watched all the old westerns in black and white, so I am an expert in this area. Just wanted to bring you up to date yoda …….

Lone Ranger’s horse, Silver was. (Hi-Ho Silver, Awayyyyyy)
Roy Roger’s horse, Trigger was.

fogw on September 13, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Trojan horse. KILL THE BILL. Just KILL it. Then start over. This time, fix the flaws in the system, instead of exploiting them to blow up the system.

petefrt on September 13, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Unfortunately I think we can’t trust these guys to fix anything. The criminals have taken control of our government. I hope you all have good insurance and that we can just waiting until after the midterm election to try any more legislation at all.

For Nancy and her crew they have one goal–to consolidate power to the left wing. Any legislation will contain payoffs that do just that.

Any small good they might ever do is off set by huge damage to our Republic.

Stop Congress from doing anything.

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 12:59 PM

The public option isn’t dead. They’ll slip it back in when they reconcile the House and Senate versions.

hachiban on September 13, 2009 at 1:01 PM

No matter how the various “bills” are weasel-worded, this is the goal.

He is attempting to subvert the Constitution. That’s an impeachable offense.

MrScribbler on September 13, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Problem is Congress has been doing this for a century now.

larvcom on September 13, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Somehow I don’t believe the NYT trying to convince us the Public Option is dead.

Enoxo on September 13, 2009 at 12:54 PM

You are right. They are trying to lull us into not noticing the Trojan horse is full of government control. And criminals did I mention criminals today?

That ACORN thing is so much worse than I could have imagined. Imagine what goes on inside the Unions and other left wing groups. It makes me sick to think they are passing bills with payoffs in them.

petunia on September 13, 2009 at 1:03 PM

fogw on September 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

fogw, I always got those two horses mixed up.

yoda on September 13, 2009 at 1:06 PM

That proposal took on a life of its own, but it now appears to be dying, a victim of an ineffectual White House strategy, the president’s failure to argue passionately for the “public option” and all-out opposition by the insurance industry and much of the health care industry.

Hey, didn’t the NYT get Axelrod’s talking points for today. I’m pretty sure they went a) Americans voted for reform b) we’ve laid out a clear strategy for change c) the president has shown clear leadership and d) 46 million Americans are uninsured with 14,000 losing coverage every day—or something like that.

Is the NYT calling Barack Obama a liar? Why are they trying to destroy this “histrionic” er, “HISTORIC” presidency….?

ted c on September 13, 2009 at 1:07 PM

4. The maximum any lawsuit can pay for malpractice is 25X the average income of the injured party over the past 3 years or $2M whichever is higher.

–Wouldn’t work. If someone is seriously injured by a medical error (think serious brain injury or quadraplegic), the on-going medical care for the rest of their life will exceed those numbers.

Jimbo3 on September 13, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I don’t purport to be an expert on health insurance or the economy, but I do believe Obama is inept about economic/financial matters and he does intend that the co-ops evolve into a government-run system–and the latter for control, not the improvement of American lives.

The GOP needs to do what it can to spook Blue Dogs enough to kill the bill. To do so, they need to swiftly dissect whatever comes forward from the Dems and devise a list, in priority, of unified criticisms. At the same time, they need to offer concrete alternatives that make sense to Americans.

For example, though HR 3200 was 1,000+ pages long, serious criticism (and I do include Palin’s “death panels” critique in that category) came far too slow and largely in dribs and drabs. The GOP needs a bullet-point list of critisms that shreds the Dem plan in the eyes of Americans.

Has anyone seen the ads for Ally, a bank? It has a smart-aleck sales-type trying to play games with kids the way some hucksters try to do (two girls–one getting a real pony, one getting a toy pony because she wasn’t told she could have a real pony; a girl who isn’t allowed to ride a bike outside a small area without an extra fee; a boy who’s allowed to play with a truck for only a short time). They are great ads, and the GOP needs similar ads that demonstrate how the Dems plans will turn the table on existing healthcare.

Again, the GOP needs to communicate a contemporaneous list of constructive improvements that any idiot can review and conclude, “Yeah, why do this Dem bullsh*t when we need only do this?”

In short, GOP, identify the problems, list and show how the Dem solutions won’t solve those problems, and then provide alternatives that most people will agree will go a long way towards improving things.

BuckeyeSam on September 13, 2009 at 1:14 PM

no, no, it’s not dead, it’s restin

agmartin on September 13, 2009 at 1:15 PM

I haven’t seen the following point raised (if it has been, I apologize):

If the plan to penalize those who choose not to buy health insurance is implemented through the IRS, where does that leave individuals who, because of religious reasons, do not believe in using medicine, doctors and/or hospitals?

Wouldn’t the penalty of up to $3,800 violate the separation clause?

Just wondering.

GrannyDee on September 13, 2009 at 1:20 PM

The Government Option will not be dead until the socialists of both parties have been driven from office.

Dave R. on September 13, 2009 at 1:25 PM

There’s one aspect of the debate that I haven’t seen discussed anywhere and that is the authority of the states. States have their own insurance regulatory authorities and determine which companies can do business, the forms of insurance that can be issued and the terms of the policies. A good portion of health insurance problems are created by state regulations that force health insurance premiums to skyrocket.

What is the role of the states under national health care/insurance reform? Is insurance a 10th amendment issue, do the feds have the power to dictate to the states? If a state currently requires insurers to cover athletic trainers, in vitro fertilization, smoking cessation, naturopaths, pastoral counseling and smoking cessation and extends coverage to grandchilden, can the feds over ride the mandates or force insurers to add new coverages, such as abortion and sex reassignment?

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Dave R. on September 13, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Agreed and neither will our liberties be secure until we drive a stake through the heart of Big Government and those that seek to control us.

DerKrieger on September 13, 2009 at 1:37 PM

We should not accept any bill that expands government’s role one iota. The only acceptable bill is one that reduces government and expands the free market.

Even Leftists know, I believe, that the market solutions will work but since their goal is control and not problem resolution they will fight against any and all free market reforms. Any compromise with the Democrats is a victory for them because they will have gotten at least a piece of that which they seek and will just come back again and again for the rest until they have what they want. An as long as there are RINO’s the Dems will continue to have success moving their agenda forward.

DerKrieger on September 13, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Is insurance a 10th amendment issue, do the feds have the power to dictate to the states?

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 1:36 PM

The feds don’t have the power to dictate health care to the states. Social issues were almost exclusively delegated to the states. Health insurance and health care are among the biggest lines of demarcation between the states’ authority and the federal government. Look at Arizona Prop 101 from 2008, which only lost by .4%. You can imagine what that vote would be, now.

Federal mandates for health insurance and health care services will be the major flash point between the states and the feds, and after the federal courts take the feds’ side, there will be hell to pay. The federal government encroaching on the states in this way is a total abrogation of the Constitutional restrictions placed on the feds and renders the Constitution dead and void.

progressoverpeace on September 13, 2009 at 1:44 PM

White House “ineffectual.”

Yup.

Bruno Strozek on September 13, 2009 at 1:47 PM

We need a stake, hammer, cloves of garlic…

Loxodonta on September 13, 2009 at 12:13 PM
…silver bullets, crucifix…

BuckeyeSam on September 13, 2009

Gallon of holy water…

SKYFOX on September 13, 2009 at 2:00 PM

Cantor was on cnn saying that they are going to replace the public option with a co-op or trigger option. He said that the houses and senate will both have bills and try to shove the public option back in during reconciliation. It’s not over yet. He also said they can shove the reconciled bill through with the nuclear option. I don’t trust any of them. They need to start over.

Brat4life on September 13, 2009 at 2:05 PM

progressoverpeace on September 13, 2009 at 1:44 PM

I’ve been surfing the issue today and can find references to only Pawlenty and a handful of states considering nullification of federal law. Today Think Progress claims that Pawlenty is backing away from earlier statements on states’ rights. Leftists seem to be arguing that it’s a human rights issue and therefore outside of the states’ jurisdiction.

I don’t understand why this hasn’t been an enormous issue in the entire debate.

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 2:07 PM

This is just the beginning! We have a long way to go before we are done!

d1carter on September 13, 2009 at 2:08 PM

Can anyone get to the bloviator O’Reilly? He is sooo full of himself, meanwhile he is falling for a huge lie or is perpetuating it at the very least, that Obama means it when he talks about no public option and tort reform. I can no longer watch the guy. I hope Glenn Beck cleans his clock soon, in ratings that is.

immigrantchick on September 13, 2009 at 2:12 PM

We need a stake, hammer, cloves of garlic…Loxodonta @ 12:13

silver bullets, crucifix……………………….…BuckeyeSam @12:55

—————————————————————–

…………..and Buffy

ziggyville on September 13, 2009 at 2:15 PM

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 2:07 PM

There are something like 30 states considering 10th amendment laws and amendments. I’m not sure how many are based on health care and health insurance (Montana’s is gun-based, for instance) but I think most are health-related.

I don’t understand why this hasn’t been an enormous issue in the entire debate.

For the same reason that Constitutional issues have been almost totally ignored in the health care debate, with people arguing the specifics about cost and such, instead. The left, of course, never talk Constitutionality, since they are trying their best to permanently break the Constitution, but the right has been fairly remiss on addressing this. Most people seem to have the attitude of allah – anything can be done under the COmmerce Clause, so don’t even bother referencing the Constitution for anything. It’s sad and pathetic, but this is what we have on our side, to a good extent.

progressoverpeace on September 13, 2009 at 2:21 PM

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 2:07 PM

Here’s a list of state referenda for 10th amendment laws and amendments.

progressoverpeace on September 13, 2009 at 2:23 PM

progressoverpeace

Thanks! It’s dispiriting to see so little regard for the Constitution, guess my concern makes me far right. There’s no time for depression,though, too much community organizing to be done.

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 2:35 PM

Working on Sunday is no way to run a country.

sonnyspats1 on September 13, 2009 at 2:45 PM

Good!!

Now let’s get rid of that individual mandate nonsense.

JohnGalt23 on September 13, 2009 at 2:52 PM

As the South American businessman said of his mother-in-law’s corpse: “Embalm, cremate and then bury. Take no chances!”

mojo on September 13, 2009 at 2:59 PM

In its place will come co-ops, which have the potential for the same kind of problem the public option presents.

Not a potential — a guarantee. Let’s not kid ourselves.

They’ll create suicidal hoops for insurance companies to jump through. None will measure up to yet-to-be-determined government standards, and the all-beneficent ship of statists will be forced to step in and establish the sovereignty of single-payer, for the good of us all.

Meanwhile, they will cull the herd while refining the “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions” through Medicare.

Nichevo on September 13, 2009 at 3:09 PM

This garbage is going to be like Jason in those Friday the 13th movies.

ddrintn on September 13, 2009 at 3:18 PM

That proposal took on a life of its own, but it now appears to be dying, a victim of an ineffectual White House strategy, the president’s failure to argue passionately for the “public option” and all-out opposition by the insurance industry and much of the health care industry.

Who cares about arguing passionately for anything?

Try arguing logically. And throw some details in there while you’re at it.

misslizzi on September 13, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Who cares about arguing passionately for anything?

Try arguing logically. And throw some details in there while you’re at it.

misslizzi on September 13, 2009 at 3:47 PM

I guess they’re upset that there weren’t more smears of Palin and the town hall protesters.

ddrintn on September 13, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Don’t forget for a second. Our backs are up against the wall.

There is only one way out.

Fight.

Fight.

Fight.

Saltysam on September 13, 2009 at 4:52 PM

They’ll create suicidal hoops for insurance companies to jump through. None will measure up to yet-to-be-determined government standards, and the all-beneficent ship of statists will be forced to step in and establish the sovereignty of single-payer, for the good of us all.

Don’t forget that the Senate’s putting extra taxes on insurers to help inflate premiums.

obladioblada on September 13, 2009 at 5:12 PM

Working on Sunday is no way to run a country.

sonnyspats1 on September 13, 2009 at 2:45 PM

Because that’s the only way to send a letter to St. Kennedy.

unclesmrgol on September 13, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Why can’t Obama and Co just pass a law that says

1. Insurance companies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, but they can charge a premium for customers that have them. The premiums cannot be more than 25% higher than what the rate would be without the condition.

2. Insurance companies cannot cancel a policy once enacted, except for failure to pay.

3. If you make under $X a year the govt will give you $Y to buy insurance. Nobody but US citizens and permanent residents will be eligible for the subsidy and proof of citizenship, either in the form of a passport, birth certificate or green card will be required to receive the subsidy.

4. The maximum any lawsuit can pay for malpractice is 25X the average income of the injured party over the past 3 years or $2M whichever is higher.

The law could be written in 10 pages, cost next to nothing ti implement and solve 90% of the problems with health insurance today.

angryed on September 13, 2009 at 12:25 PM

It has nothing to do with they “can’t”. It has everything to do with POWER. They will say who jumps, when they jump, and how high they jump. If you don’t want to play, you get screwed. “DEATH PANELS” begin to sound like the shortest route to peace. Their intention is to squeeze, squeeze, and squeeze again, until every last capitalist/conservative (aka anybody who’s not in the right group) that draws breath feels the pain of Barry’s disdain for as long as you live under his wretched fist.
Or were you being rhetorical?

Blacksmith8 on September 13, 2009 at 6:39 PM

Smoke and mirrors, my friends. Smoke and mirrors.

The leftists will sneak it in somewhere, and the party formerly known as Republican (and currently known as “eunuch”) will comply so they can be in with the in crowd.

Bottom line is the health care and health insurance industries need no reform. The corrupt government needs the reforming, and now.

KILL THIS BILL

J.J. Sefton on September 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM

Kill HR 3200; it will still limit our economic freedom and infringe on our civil liberties.

Ed, if it comes up in the House for a vote with the details you indicate it will still contain, it will be time to repeat in DC the Income Tax Revolt tactics of 1999 in Tennessee. The 1999 Revolt was way short of an insurrection as was Shay’s Rebellion of 1786, but the 1999 Revolt was successful in stopping the state of Tennessee from establishing a state income tax. Today TN still does not have an income tax. The TEA Party movement had better plan for a quick “assault” on DC should congress ignore the will of the people that was so visually demonstrated yesterday.

amr on September 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM

You want to make a lib’s head explode?

Tell them that you support a public option as long as it comes with compulsory military service.

Then you will see if they believe in the common good or just getting something for nothing.

erakis on September 13, 2009 at 7:55 PM

You want to make a lib’s head explode?

Tell them that you support a public option as long as it comes with compulsory military service.

Then you will see if they believe in the common good or just getting something for nothing.

erakis on September 13, 2009 at 7:55 PM

BRAVO ZULU!

Khun Joe on September 13, 2009 at 8:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2