Legal Commentary

A Blue State Public Option?

By Big Tent Democrat

Late in the day on HCR for creative thinking, but Ezra Klein writes:

This, from a smart reader, seems like a better compromise than a "trigger":

Maybe we should be allowing states to choose if they bring in a public option themselves? At least we can get CA, NY, and many of the big pieces into play and see how it works. That seems far better than giving up the whole pie, as they seem intent on doing.

. . . This would be particularly true if states could choose whether or not to tie their public option to Medicare rates, thus creating an insurance alternative that would actually work to provide savings. . . .

If you allowed states to band together in "public option co-ops" and only imposed an individual mandate in states with public options, you would have my support, FWTW (nothing.) This way, the red states could be happy with lousy health care and blue states could be happy with real health care reform. Of course, that's abandoning a lot of Dems in red states (and a lot of Progressive Caucus members hail from some of those states, CBC members especially.) They'll rightly protest. But "incrementalism" is the watchword right?

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on September 14, 2009 (boomark / email).