The Zombie Option

Posted on 03/12/2010 at 2:08 pm by Bob Cesca

It’s alive! It’s dead! It’s alive again! It’s dead again.

This time, I think it’s dead. For now.

“We had it; we wanted it,” Pelosi said. “It’s not in reconciliation.” She added: “We’re talking about something that’s not going to be part of the legislation.”

Now, that’s not to say it’s permanently dead. One major advantage to passing the bill will be the ability to improve it with additional measures that can easily be plugged into the infrastructure it establishes.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://drumsnwhistles.com/ Karoli

    Yeah, it’s dead for now and rightly so. I will never understand exactly why everyone wanted something that would actually be bankrupt in a couple of years. Well, I do. But there are better, more efficient ways to do it *after* the infrastructure is there.

  • eve

    I want a public option and am fine with waiting a bit longer for that.I want this bill to pass. It’s a very good start after waiting decades for reform.

  • JG

    I am not for the Public Option at this time because the Dems have f’d this up so much, they really need to get a “win” under their belt. It is a baby step, but very important in the eyes of our horse race oriented “liberal” media. I think if they pass the Senate bill with the sidecar fix, the Dems will gain the momentum.One thing about “Waterloo” is it works both ways. When the bill passes the LIES are exposed even more. I think it may even be the Republican’s Waterloo judging by their breathless hate filled rants against this bill.

  • LeeVanSpleef

    Bob, What about Alan Grayson’s Medicare buy-in bill?

  • keithalso

    Are we talking about a “public option” being different from “medicare expansion” to include more people? Do you think Pelosi is playing this so that those Dems against a public option will calm down? And, last question, what is in the bill now that is going to keep costs down they way a Public Option was intended to?

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Bob, the sense I get is that Pelosi is putting this particular ball in the Senate’s court. All the oh noes are (as usual) premature.

  • http://tarackian.deviantart.com/ J M Ashby

    ffsjust pass the damn bill alreadyadd to it/fix it after!

  • Irish Girl

    Matt, earlier in the day, it was reported that the Senate had already indicated they would not put the PO in and that the ball was in the House’s court. If the House included it, then the Senate would back it. But the Senate would NOT include it themselves. So Pelosi’s current statement means the ball is in nobody’s court at this point.Which is fine with me. Although I’m a PO supporter, I think we need to pass what we’ve got and work from that point to make corrections.

  • camel54

    Agreed, let’s get this dog-killin’ over with. It would be nice if Grayson’s bill got some traction, but it seems unlikely. I love his description of it–the simplicity. Although I wish Grayson would have named it “Medicare Expansion” or something that didn’t include the words “public” and “option” since we all know that’s the equivalent of marxist/maoist/hitler/commie/che-lovin’ socialized medicine.I’ve enjoyed seeing the Pres get all rowdy lately, though. That’s been refreshing.