Dem Senator Denies Rahm Said Obama Ready To Nix Public Option
A key Democratic Senator who met with Rahm Emanuel last night is denying an explosive report saying Emanuel privately signaled the White House’s willingness to take the public option off the table to get health care reform done.
A spokesperson for Senator Kent Conrad tells me that Emanuel was making a far more general comment and was “in no way” talking about doing away with the public option.
This story has been raging since Bloomberg reported Conrad and fellow Senator Max Baucus’s claim that Emanuel had told Senators that Obama could nix the public option. Bloomberg quoted Conrad saying Emanuel and Obama are “open to alternatives” to a public plan.
Not so, says Conrad spokesperson Chris Thorne, who emails:
Conrad says Emanuel was speaking in reference to the need to overhaul the health care system as a whole — to forge compromise and get a bill to the president’s desk. It was in no way a comment on the president’s willingness to do away with a public option.
It’s also worth noting that the Bloomberg story only paraphrases Conrad’s claim. And it seems unlikely that Rahm would explicitly take the public option off the table during negotiations.
It’s true that Obama himself at the presser yesterday refused to rule out backing reform without a public option. But Emanuel was alleged to have gone considerably farther in his private conversation with Senators. It’ll be a bit of a relief to backers of a public option that Senator Conrad is denying Emanuel ever said it.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I’m sure BigO’s disinclination to insist on a public option just means he doesn’t want to rule out a single-payer plan. (*cough*)
Prediction
sg, you were right, credit is due. and jzap/sg, what’s our read? we think Obama is not particularly concerned about idea of public plan in heart of hearts? that’s my sense
Et voilà! I knew something was funny about that. It appears that Obama is more or less following Ezra Klein, who I believe is the sole healthcare policy guru, advocating that Obama NOT break some skulls yet. Keep everything open until absolutely necessary.
Yeah, the signals Obama and his administration have been sending are discouraging. I’m sure they’d settle for anything that “works,” but it’s hard to imagine anything other than single-payer or public-option that really will work. Still, letting the bipartisan string play itself out is good optics, and the semi-nuclear reconciliation option is still there.
Sigh. I sure wish Al Franken were there to give us some non-mealy-mouthed straight talk!
Not that Obama cares what I think, but I have written to the WH and said if Obama caves on a public option, he will lose my vote.
SG, I’m not sure what you have against Jane Hamsher. She has opinions just like you do, and like a lot of other bloggers do. She doesn’t like Rahm, nor do a lot of people who have watched him in action.
But why the put-downs?
So, the news (before it was not news) was:
You heard from Bloomberg that Conrad said that Emanuel said that Obama might think…
What is this, junior high?
This blog must get serious. Too many shoot from the hip posts followed by disclaimers. modifications, etc. Greg, you need to be more selective. Take this from someone who enjoyed your work at TPM and wants you to succeed.
MsMolly
.
I don’t think I put Jane Hamsher down. I said she is obsessed with Rahm because she is. I actually like most of her other work, but she isn’t objective at all when it comes to him and she has posted several factually challenged hit pieces on him and I have gone in her comments section to correct the record. I could care less if people love or hate Rahm up and until they lose their objectivity. She doesn’t seem to get that turning people on Rahm when its not warranted also turns them on Pres Obama. If its warranted thats fine, if it isn’t then thats very unhelpful. I call them as I see them always Ms Molly, no matter who the subject is. Now if you can point out something I said that crossed the line I will take a second look and if agree I will admit it. But I don’t think I did.
Greg. As for your question, if Pres Obama wasn’t really concerned with public option somehow I don’t think Bloomberg article would have been watered down almost immediately nor would Conrad have spoken up against the original framing. If it didn’t matter I don’t think he would have given such a testy and expansive answer on it yesterday pushing back on fearmongering right wing talking points about putting private companies out of business After everything he has done in support of pub option its counterfactual to me in my mind to say he isn’t a big proponent. He is just trying to avoid being a target right now. Thats why if you notice he is open to EVERYTHING. That way wingnuts have a harder time trying to use him to smear bill and vice versa. Its smart if not sometimes frustrating to us politics.
SG — very true. everyone focused on Obama’s refusal to commit to a public option, and not on how strongly he shot down arguments against it. And Alan, I don’t think posting a Bloomberg article with on the record quotes is “shooting from the hip,” and following up with Conrad’s office strikes me as the responsible thing to do. I do appreciate your wanting the blog to work, though.
sg- that’s pretty much my reading as well. It strikes me as a rather tragic consequence of the last eight years (particularly, but really the last two or three decades) that we so commonly assume a political figure’s statements are deceitful or merely utilitarian. We’ve almost lost hope that a political leader might value and demonstrate integrity.
Obama may be afraid of the charge of socialism, but without a public option healtcare reform is unaffordable.
We already spend more per capita than any other country.Without a public option covering the uninsured would drive us bankrupt.
See may article on my blog at blogspot.
The public option alone won’t rein in costs and neither would single payer. We need an extremely strong CER that will mandate changes to the way doctors and hospitals do business. Fee for service and medical malpractice insurance need huge changes too. Best practices that result in best medical outcomes should be rewarded, not most therapies and tests ordered or beds filled.
The GOP and insurers have run a dishonest PR campaign for decades, aided and abetted by the media, about their ever rising med malpractice insurance prices. Every time their market investments go south they raise prices and blame it on a wave of nonexistent jackpot jury awards in frivolous lawsuits.
Make the VA’s record keeping system mandatory among all providers. It’s about the best in the world.
We have one chance to get this right. If we don’t “Yes We Can” will become ‘No You Didn’t” in 2010 and 2012. We can’t let that happen.
By the way, Bloomberg has now completely changed the story, without any indication of the later made edits. There is no reference at all to the White House now.
I used to give the Greens a pretty hard time but I am so damn fed up with the Dems promising change and then giving us more of the same that I’m ready to make my apologies and start thinking about going third party.
How many times can we be played for suckers?
If this guy wimps out on either the public health option or the issue of Israeli settlements, I wash my hands of him.
The public option needs to stay, that is the whole point. Also – taxing current health-care spending breaks a campaign promise – so they need to figure out how to pay for this, and without raising taxes on people making less that 250k per year.
Great information, I will be linking back to you and going to look around at your other posts.
Great info here, nice site I will be checking out the other articles you have and linking back to your site.