The NYT tonight hit the nail on the head. As the public option gains steam with opinion polls show surging support and liberals emboldened after the release of Baucus’ initial plans it notes the public is in for a rude awakening. Every day here and in the msm I keep hearing about getting "public option." Well I for one, and 65 percent of the people agree, do not want "a public option." What we want is a public option open to everyone, regardless of what employers provide. What the public demands is a Medicare linked INCLUSIVE PUBLIC OPTION. Not a public option open to individuals and small business. Most Americans want to pick a government plan if they want and do not think it should be walled off.
So the public wants a real public option more than the Congress or POTUS. These numbers should help give momentum to liberals to push for the next step here- a public option open to all. A inclusive one tied to Medicare. Note the NYT poll asks if folks would approve having the choice between a Medicare style plan and private plans. Dems, Repubs and Indies , by a majority say they want that choice. Does the public understand that "a public option" as proposed by Congress, will not cover most of them? That they, if employed by a large businesses, will not be afforded real choices?
Over and over the term public option is repeated, but some liberals on the Hill should really take note. The public is waay ahead of the bills in Congress. They want to choose. Furthermore, if the theory goes a strong pubic option will lower insurance rates then it would it not need to compete on a much larger scale than what Congress is proposing? We should demand not "a public option" but a INCLUSIVE PUBLIC OPTION. This is imperative.
As NYT notes , and many others too on the Hill, is the Wyden Free Choices idea the way to go? Allow government plans and private ones compete in a national exchange that anyone can use even if their employer provides insurance. Liberal orgs pushing the public option need to now weigh in for more than a limited one and push for real choice for every American. After all, the people in a bipartisan fashion want this kind of choice. Yet on the Hill all we hear is the public option must be walled in etc so not to scare the GOP off. Well real republicans, a plurality, want that public option choice.
From NYT:
...But what members of the public seem to prefer and what Congress plans to give them may not be the same thing.
For example, the Times/CBS poll asked: Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government-administered health insurance plan — something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get — that would compete with private insurance plans? The poll question was phrased generally so that it could be asked in repeated surveys over time regardless of any specific legislative proposal.
With the question asked that way, most respondents supported the idea, with 65 percent in favor, 26 percent opposed and 9 percent offering no position.
But in Congress, none of the legislative proposals that include the public option would make it available to everyone. In fact, the public option, at least at the outset, would not be an option for most Americans, particularly those who already have health insurance.
The public, in other words, may have more appetite for the public option than many in Congress do.....
/Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, has criticized all of the health care proposals for not offering enough choices, particularly to the majority of Americans who already have employer-sponsored coverage. Mr. Wyden has argued that additional options would create competition and help reduce prices.
As my colleague Robert Pear points out, President Obama, in an address to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9, said the government plan "would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance." And "based on Congressional Budget Office estimates," he said, "we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up."...
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.c...
NYT: Liberals Push Harder for Stronger Health Bill
http://www.nytimes.com/...