When Sherrod Brown and Tom Harkin start throwing in the towel and start trying to convince progressives that they won, you know Nancy Pelosi and Raul Grijlava can't be far beyond. There was never going to be a new public component in this legislation. The fix was in from the beginning. Obama knew it. Emanuel knew it. And Reid knew it. They just strung progressives along by the waving the carrot of the public option in their faces. Knowing all along that it would be thrown over the side at the end.
Little did progressives and teabaggers know that all the sturm and drang over the public option was a dog and pony show. But at least the teabaggers and their Republican sponsors can take the satisfaction of watching a divided Democratic party as a result. And can crow over stopping a "government takeover of health care" [sic]. What do progressives get out of it? With the exception of the pre-existing condition provision, Zilcho.
It would have been better for them and the party has Obama just come out and say he was opposed to a public option from the beginning. At least we wouldn't have wasted our efforts trying to get one, and the party would have been in far better shape. And considering his less than enthusiastic support, and nonexistent efforts, for a public option, he might as well have stated his opposition from the start.
So now we're starting to get the "assuage the progressive base" campaign. People in congress we thought would fight till the end will, and have, started to tell use what a great bill this is. As will the Ezra Kleins, Nate Silvers and Jonathan Cohns of the world. But here's the bottom line. If what comes out of the senate is the, or close to, the final bill:
$30 million or so people will be forced to buy insurance from the very people who have fought us in our effort to change the system to add more of a public component.
Several million people, at least, will see their existing coverage reduced as a result of the tax on high quality health plans.
There will be no elimination of the health insurers' antit-trust exemption.
They're may (I'm not sure on this point) be a weakening of state regulation of health insurers as insurers are allowed to sell policies across state lines.
There may be a financial limit on coverage for a particular year, despite a provision saying that there should be no such limit.
No public option or, alternatively, no expanded Medicare.
No tax on the wealthy to pay for the subsidies.
This is what we end up with? Frankly, despite their current opposition, what we get is not markedly different from what the Republicans would have come up with if they had been in power and decided to push health care reform. It certainly is not progressive reform.
In the end, it would have been better if they just passed a bill with one line, "there shall be no discrimination for pre-existing conditions," and left it at that, rather than engage in this charade. It wasn't worth it.