Did we just lose?

Not hoping for this to hit the reclist, just am hit with some doubts now.  Did we lose the battle on the public option?

I'm going off of some of what Ezra Klein wrote here:

As it is, the public option is shackled on three levels: It's limited to the exchange, it's limited to states that want to offer it, and it's limited to "negotiated rates" rather than Medicare rates.

(I got there from this article.)

It seems that Pelosi giving up on Medicare + 5 (which seems like a lousy compromise to begin with) might not make the public plan particularly competitive compared to private plans.  Obama's deal to not seek discounts on prescription drugs have an impact here too.  I don't have high hopes that Wyden's amendment to open the public plan to everyone will get very far.

Just how far away are we from being able to buy an actually-cheaper health insurance plan with good coverage, without feeling locked in to our employers?

Ezra again:

the public plan will pay prices equivalent to those of private insurers and may save a bit of money on administrative efficiencies. But because the public option is, well, public, it won't want to do the unpopular things that insurers do to save money, like manage care or aggressively review treatments. It also, presumably, won't try to drive out the sick or the unhealthy. That means the public option will spend more, and could, over time, develop a reputation as a good home for bad health risks, which would mean its average premium will increase because its average member will cost more.

Don't get me wrong - government catastrophic care is a good thing, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of pricing power here anymore.