Tester favors public option

Nothing first hand, eh? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Rusty Shackleford @ Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 16:01:57 PM UTC

Possible to improve public option later? (0.00 / 0)

The politics of this being what they are, I wonder if it might not be a good idea to settle for a weak "public option" now and make it more robust later, even before it's supposed to go into effect in 2013. Getting the congress to accept the word "public" in legislation will be a major victory.

It's the camel's nose under the tent, I hope, on the way to single payer.    

---

by: Turner @ Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 18:16:51 PM UTC

Jay, I don't see any new news here (0.00 / 0)

Just a bunch of circular commenting. I can't see anywhere that Tester said anything new. Just regurgitations of his previous noncommittal "I don't need it either way" from 6 weeks ago.

Did Tester really say something new to tie him to a PO? Or is this just a way of pressuring him to accept the meme by not responding to it, or to deny it by correcting the reports?

---

by: JC @ Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 04:07:12 AM UTC