President Obama is at a turning point, he has to decide whether to bite the hand of the Wall Street powerful that helped him rise to power or to maul the hand of those whose votes and shoe leather also put him in power. There are no easy political answers on the Public Option – only an easy moral one that’s politically smarter.
I hope Obama avoids the “split the baby” scenario of dropping the public option – that will deeply disappoint his base and bring him the scorn of his strongest supporters . He is unlikely to recover from the political calamity of a disaffected base.
The Public Option Trigger:
The White House is floating an idea that strikes me as a political “time-bomb”- they are calling it a “Public Option Trigger”. The trigger approach means there would not be a government healthcare option available unless insurance companies failed to meet Americans healthcare needs and stop the denials of coverage and care they currently engage in. Under a trigger option, private insurance companies would maintain market control in most of the country.
A “Public Option Trigger” law might ease the current Congressional log-jam but ,in addition to denying the public a cost effective healthcare option similar to Medicare – A trigger poses an increase in political risk for Democratic control of Congress -and with that ,much of The President’s Agenda and ability to appoint judges and other officials .
A “Public Option Trigger” law would posit an explicit threat to the Insurance Industry and would practically mandate that insurance interest place a colossal “bulls-eye” on the back off every Democrat in an “unsafe Congressional District”. Any insurance CEO would be duty bound by shareholder obligation to do the utmost to roll-back a trigger aimed at shareholders interest .
The Political Reality :
The best way for the Insurance Industry to avoid the threat of a trigger ever taking effect, is to change the balance of power in Congress and change the law . The campaign to elect “non-trigger candidates” will start as soon as a law with a “Pubic Option Trigger” takes final form, even before the ink dries on the Congressional bill.
Further and little covered on TV and in major newspapers- A recent AARP Poll http://is.gd/2VChb shows that 78% of the American people favor a “Public Option”. So in terms of political calculus – it is far from certain that Democrats in swing districts will suffer any negative impact with voters for supporting a Public Option .
In fact, I and others will argue that a good “Public Option” that meets our health care needs can be a political plus for a person who votes for it -just as a very flawed “Medicare Part D” law was , for those who supported it.
In terms of smart politics , when contrasted against the certain political opposition the insurance industry will mount in the 2010 mid-terms, to roll-back “Pubic Option Triggers” – the far smarter vote for Democrats in swing districts is to vote for a triggerless “Public Option” that takes effect as soon as possible .
A strong public option gives Democrats in swing districts a marquee political result they can campaign on. Equally important, a triggerless “Public Option” avoids putting a certain political bull’s-eye on their backs.
Given where the economy and unemployment is likely to be in 2010 , Democrats will need a great healthcare result to run on . It will give Dems some credibility on our economic message which will still be by necessity : We are better than the GOP at serving the people and fixing the economy -we gave the people a good healthcare bill .
Democrats will need Health-care sucess to run on and a stripped down shell
that only fixes the edges -will not get it done .
Moreover, as we well know , the GOP will mercilessly flog a “weak bill” as a symbol of Democratic Party failure on Healthcare.
One hopes the the moral and smart path is chosen
