Why Reid Shouldn’t Include The Public Option In The Merged Senate Bill

Think Progress by Igor Volsky | Oct. 5, 2009 (Opinion)

Lawrence O’Donnell — who served as Senate Finance Committee staff director during the debate over President Clinton’s failed health care reforms — tells Politico’s Live Pulse that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) shouldn’t merge the Senate Finance Committee’s health bill with the HELP Committee’s far more progressive alternative. Sen. George Mitchell tried that in 1994 and Republicans went line-by-line successfully defeating the bill Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins

See All Reviews »

View

Review

Derek Hawkins
3.2
 by Derek Hawkins - Oct. 5, 2009

An odd perspective, especially coming from the notably liberal Think Progress. Volsky stakes his case on the quote from O'Donnell -- not a bad idea, except he doesn't mention the host of other problems the Clintons had pushing reform in '94 and why they failed in the end. Circumstances are different this time around, as we've seen throughout the course of this months-long debate.

Excluding the public option from the Senate bill could broaden the health care debate. Republicans will complain that they need assurances that a public option won’t be added in during conference. They’ll spend more energy questioning the constitutionality of the individual mandate, the wisdom of eliminating the overpayments to private insurers participating in Medicare Advantage, rationing abortions to women, and ensuring that legal immigrants don’t have access to care.

Derek posted this story.

See All Reviews »

Derek's Rating

Overall
3.2

Average
from 12 answers
Quality
3.3
Information
4.0
Insight
3.0
Style
3.0
Context
2.0
Expertise
4.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.0
Responsibility
3.0
Popularity
3.0
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
3.0
More How our ratings work »