Ryan Grim at HuffPo reports that Kent Conrad has made some major concessions toward the broad outlines of a public option, while Chuck Schumer says the co-op plan Conrad has outlined so far is dead in the water.
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) moved sharply toward public health care Monday, saying that he could "absolutely" support major parts of Sen. Chuck Schumer's compromise proposal for a public option after closed-door negotiations.
Conrad has backed a health care co-op proposal that advocates of a public option have thoroughly rejected. Schumer (D-N.Y.) took their side on Sunday in comments made to the Associated Press. "I don't think I could say with a straight face that this [co-op proposal] is at all close to a nationwide public option," Schumer said. "Right now, this co-op idea doesn't come close to satisfying anyone who wants a public plan."
There's some dispute as to whether this signals Conrad moving or Schumer moving, and reading between the lines, I'd say it was the former. Conrad made major concessions, now accepting a national structure, and national purchasing power for the system. Those are key concessions, possibly driven by comments made earlier in the day by Schumer:
"I don't think I could say with a straight face that this (co-op proposal) is at all close to a nationwide public option," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "Right now, this co-op idea doesn't come close to satisfying anyone who wants a public plan."
Could a co-op become a national public option? It's not out of the question that the public plan could take the form of a co-op if it contains the basic principles necessary for a strong public health program, that it be: national in scope and available everywhere, accountable to the government, able to negotiate to set prices, be ready on day one--no triggers, no delays. IMO, Schumer set the bar and Conrad is the one bending. It still doesn't mean that the plan the Finance Committee comes up with is a modified Conrad.
But there's a larger issue at play here, that Ezra points up, Republicans aren't biting at the co-op compromise either:
I think people are focusing too much on Schumer's comments on the public plan and not enough on the insight he's offering into the negotiations happening on the Finance Committee.
Schumer said Finance Republicans had rejected several proposals designed to beef up the suggested nonprofit insurance co-ops. These included setting up a national structure for the co-ops, $10 billion in government seed money, power to negotiate payment rates to medical providers nationwide and creation of a presidentially appointed board of directors.
This is what we call a "clarifying moment." One of the arguments against the public plan is that it's the thin edge of single-payer wedge. Many liberals, in fact, hope that it will prove exactly that. But "level-playing field plans" -- public plans with no extra subsidies or legislative advantages -- take care of those objections. But that concession from the liberals hasn't been greeted as significant by those across the aisle.
Which is the key, which even Conrad has had to concede regarding the Republicans: "It would just be my surmise on why some of them don't like it. They really don't want a competitive model, at least some of them." Schumer has said that Dems might be at the point of going it alone on health care reform, and if they're at that point, the co-op option loses most of its luster. But Kent Conrad, representing many of those mushy middle Democrats, has been brought along to accepting some of the critical concepts a public option needs to contain.