Barbara Boxer stated on Countdown tonight that states will be allowed to establish a "public option"

[mzmolly]

if they so choose. Dean eluded to this recently on MSNBC as well. Basically states will be given funding to develop pilot programs and they'll have much leeway in how they do so. In other words, we'll have an "opt in" for the states!

I believe this fact isn't being openly flaunted as of yet, because we want the bill to pass? ;)

Watch and listen for more info in this regard, gang!

:toast:

[Ozymanithrax]

1. I am sure this is just another corporate Republican trick to make us think they hate the bill...

:sarcasm:
Boxer is my Senator, and a progressive. I look forward to hearing more.

[mzmolly]

13. Indeed! Hey, some so called supporter of the "public option" just unrecc'd the thread.

Imagine that? Boxer says something great and some DU-ers don't want to hear it?

[Ozymanithrax]

21. This will be the most progressive bill signed by a President since Johnson...

created Medicare and Medicaid.

And so many self professed progressives are trying to sink it because they seem to believe that corporations are ruling the universe.

There is an irony in there, somewhere.

And a lot of people have lost sight of what's important.

[laughingliberal]

24. Oh, I do not think corporations are ruliing the universe

just the known universe...;-)

[mzmolly]

32. Irony...

indeed.

[Cant trust em]

2. Shhh. Don't get too excited about it.

Lieberman will try to kill it out of spite.

[mzmolly]

5. I'm not

trust me! :hi:

[ThomCat]

16. Starts are on austerity budgets. They are starving.

Giving the states the responsibility for saving universal health care is a last ditch effort, and I hope it has a chance of success. But how do they see states having any chance in hell of being able to sustain funding for this?

States are hemorrhaging funds and are legally required to slash services in order to balance their check books every year. Is the Federal Government going to follow historical patterns and toss some grossly inadequate block grants at the states, that dwindle after a year or so, and leave the states on the hook?

Expanding Medicare had chance because the expertise and infrastructure were already there!

Are they really expecting all 50 states to start from scratch and reinvent the wheel on whatever minor startup funds they manage to squeeze past the conservatives? We know damned well the conservatives are going to fight this tooth and nail too. :(

What a pale and pathetic shadow this is compared to just directly giving everyone medicare. :(

[juno jones]

27. In that case:

Legalize pot/hemp and fund health care from the taxes on that.

Seems fitting, and the revenues would be considerable and consistent.

However, you are correct, we really need single-payer.

[burning rain]

23. It's weak enough that he'll likely allow it.

Most state legislatures are even more captive to corporate interests than Washington and will reject it, so it's a safely toothless provision from a crony capitalist point of view.

[mullard12ax7]

3. Guess which states will then watch their citizens drop dead?

The states in the South. Time to pay up for all the "oh let's just let all the torturers go" hypocrites, not to mention the war-mongering pigs who's greed rules their hypocritical lives as well. You know it's true Southerners, and you're all shaking in your boots about now.

Welcome to the states you've always wanted, better hope Social Security and Medicaid aren't next.

[misanthrope]

29. You got it...

...Those who need a federal program most, who would benefit from single payer more than any other, will go without because so many in their states--both the empowered and the lower classes they keep hypnotized--just plain don't care. It's no accident that so many of these dirt poor states make it so difficult to meet their Medicaid thresholds.

[dysfunctional press]

4. most of the states are broke.

so that isn't going to be too likely in those states.

[mzmolly]

6. The bill includes funding

for the states to do so.

[girl gone mad]

8. How much?

[mzmolly]

10. I don't know the specifics

on that yet, sorry.

[dysfunctional press]

20. and is the funding specifically earmarked for creating a public option...?

if it isn't, then it's probably not too likely to happen.

[mzmolly]

33. It isn't, but it will happen. It's already

happened in states like Minnesota with MinnesotaCare.

http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/idcplg?IdcService=GET_DYNAMIC_CONVERSION&RevisionSelectionMethod=LatestReleased&dDocName=dhs16_136855

MinnesotaCare is a publicly subsidized program for Minnesota residents who don't have access to affordable health care coverage.
Residents (except for some children) are not eligible if their employer offers health insurance and pays at least half of the monthly cost.
MinnesotaCare is funded by a tax on hospitals and health care providers, federal Medicaid matching funds and enrollee premiums.
MinnesotaCare has been critical to Minnesota’s welfare reform strategy, helping people leave welfare and go to work without losing health care coverage.
Enrollee premiums are determined according to a sliding-fee scale based on family size and income.

We had MNCare when my husband was out of work for a time. Our monthly premium was ten bucks for the entire family. It was the best coverage we've ever had.

[corpseratemedia]

7. this is a good thing if so, & hope it survives

my state has recently turned a bit bluer, but..i doubt we could have that..its still a bit too red, some of our newer dems are dinoish

but its good news

[grantcart]

9. Perhaps Boxer has been reading DU where the idea was raised yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=82257&mesg_id=82257

[mzmolly]

11. Great minds...

:hi:

Have a fabulous night GC. I'm off to ZZZZZZZZZZZ.

[travelingtypist]

12. Almost as good as just lowering the Medicare age in reconciliation.

with the stroke of a pen.

If this is true, lucky for those of us who live in tr00 blue states, will feel very sorry for the unlucky red-staters.

[mzmolly]

15. I think when we have better outcomes

they'll have no choice but to come around? ;)

[travelingtypist]

22. If we can get the 61st senator in '10, then it's a done deal anyway.

I'm just liking how people are figuring out ways around Sens. Nelson and LIEberman. It's kind of fun.

[regnaD kciN]

31. Once this bill is passed...

...it will become a lot easier to do that, because a single-purpose bill like that will be able to be passed using reconciliation, while most of the current bill couldn't have been.

We need the regulations in this bill to get through a 60-vote threshold. Once it's signed into law, most everything else we've been wanting could, sooner or later, be passed with merely 50 Senate votes plus the VP.

[Raine]

14. California is busted

how is that going to happen when there is no money here to even pay employees?

[grantcart]

17. public option would exist like a medicare buy in

just another option in the health exchange


lower income folks would get subsidies regardless of which plan they chose.

[Raine]

25. Oh OK

THANKS! :hi:

[juno jones]

28. Legalize Pot?

:shrug:

Seems it would be a great state funding mechanism. :)

[burning rain]

18. It's something, but small beer indeed.

Generally speaking, state legislatures are even more captive to corporate interests than Washington--and at a far cheaper price. Vermont will likely enact a public option, but precious few others. There is exactly zero chance that my state of Pennsylvania will.

[regnaD kciN]

30. Not necessarily...

I heard Bernie Sanders on Thom Hartmann a couple of weeks ago, and he thought that, if a few states (he specifically mentioned his native Vermont) were to take action on more-progressive systems than could be passed through Congress, it would only be a matter of time before it spread to the other states once they saw how well it worked elsewhere.

[Major Hogwash]

19. I love Barbara, but Idaho will never "opt in" for it, as neither will many other red states

That's why we need it at the federal level.

[JDPriestly]

26. That could be very good for California.

Good work by Barbara Boxer on this.

I saw the Manager's Amendment and read that language but wasn't sure what it would mean. I hope she is right.

[ThomWV]

34. Horse shit! States that can't afford Medicade sure can't afford a new med expense

And all you are doing is giving the pharma industry 50 easy targets to corrupt.

[mzmolly]

36. The bill contains FUNDING

for pilot programs, which can include the desired, public option. Also, with the talk of the ability to purchase across state lines ???

[mzmolly]

35. Why would people unrec good news?

I don't get it? Is this "cynic" Underground now?