Putting on my rose-colored glasses, I think people may be misinterpreting BHO's apparent equivocation about the public option. The way he layed it out was an explicit challenge to the other side to propose some alternative way of generating competition -- multiple providers -- where there currently is none. There is no such way. Note also BHO's definition of lack of competition was markets with as few as five providers Of health insurance. That's a pretty broad characterization. It makes it easy to justify a public option.
Bottom line is the White House wants a bill and if they have to relinquish the public option, which in its present form(s) is not that big a deal, they will. And I don't think you could blame them. A health insurance exchange for the uninsured and the uninsurable would be a good thing. I was more concerned about the pledge to veto anything that added "a dime" to the deficit. That looks like a tough thing to wiggle out of. Kind of like his campaign promise to not raise any taxes on anybody earning less than $250K. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
