Blue Dog / New Democrat rebellion over the public option?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

David Safier has written about the Blue Dogs in the House of Representatives doing their part to sabotage healthcare reform, by forcing the Democratic leadership to delay introducing their proposed bill. A letter sent by some 40 members of the Blue Dog Democrats last week (including our own Rep. Gabriel Giffords) raised eleventh hour objections to the health care reform bills working their way through Congress. As Think Progress noted:

In a letter to Speaker Pelosi, the conservative “Blue Dog” members claimed that they are concerned about the cost of the health care bill:

Paying for care reform must start with finding savings within the current delivery system and maximizing the value of our health care dollar before we ask the public to pay more. […]

The discussion draft fails to include adequate structural changes that will succeed in lowering costs and increasing value.

But the letter also comes out against a public plan, which is one of the primary tools to rein in health care costs over the long-term. The letter complains, “‘A Medicare-like’ public option would negatively impact hospitals, doctors and patients…using Medicare’s below-market rates would seriously weaken the financial stability of our local hospitals and doctors.”

Igor Volsky notes there’s “an inherent contradiction” in this letter: the Blue Dogs want to find more savings within the system, but they’re also asking that the bill spend more.

Not all Blue Dogs are running with the pack.

Fortunately, there is at least one “Blue Dog” member who understands this contradiction and is willing to break from her coalition to support a public plan. On MSNBC [last Friday] afternoon, Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) said, “I am one of those people who believes that we should be required to have a public option because it will bring the costs of health care down.” Watch it:

Sanchez is right. If the “Blue Dogs” wanted to stick to their principles of bringing costs down, they’d join with Sanchez to endorse a public plan.

The Hill reports that a Band of House centrists offers support for ‘robust’ public health insurance plan:

A band of 22 New Democrat and Blue Dog lawmakers say they support a “robust” government-run health plan, boosting chances of moving healthcare reform with a public insurance plan through the House.

* * *

the letter from the 22 New Dems and Blue Dogs indicates opposition from this group is far from universal.

“We have a broader coalition to pass this than what was assumed before,” said Rep. Lois Capps (Calif.), a New Democrat who circulated the letter supporting a public option with Rep. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “While we may belong to a more moderate branch, we want it known that we support the public option.”

The 20 New Democrats on the letter represent nearly one-third of the 68-member caucus. It is signed by two Blue Dogs and three members who are both New Dems and Blue Dogs.

Capps is one of several New Democrats who think the group’s leaders have given House leadership an inaccurate picture of where the centrist, business-friendly caucus stands on healthcare. On June 10, New Dem leaders sent a letter to Pelosi saying that “many of our members remain concerned about any public option.”

The new chairman of the New Democrats, Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) has also pressed to ensure that Medicare providers are not required to participate in the public plan.

Capps thought that went beyond the position of many fellow New Dems.

“We haven’t had a vote,” Capps said. “We shouldn’t be taking a position.”

The letter she circulated supports using the Medicare provider network for a public plan but letting providers opt out.

* * *

Many New Dems criticized their leaders and said they have not liked being lumped in with opponents of the bill, particularly the public plan.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), a relatively new member of the group, said it should consider reviewing its practices.

“The New Dems need to discuss what process they’re going to use to give positions on legislation,” said DeGette, who signed the letter.

“There is some concern that some decisions come only from talk among New Dem leadership rather than the broader leadership,” said a New Democrat lawmaker. “A lot of decisions are made by New Dem leadership and not broadly discussed in membership meetings.”

* * *

Crowley said in an interview this week that there is a broad diversity of opinion in his group on healthcare.

“Some have said they will not be for a public option under any circumstance. And some support single-payer,” Crowley said.

Murphy, who worked with Capps on the letter, said he has no problems with the way Crowley and the group’s leadership have handled healthcare.

“New Dems have been very united by the idea that a public option works only if it’s on a level playing field,” Murphy said.

Swopa at Firedog Lake gets it exactly right Loretta Sanchez: A Blue Dog Barks Back on the Public Option:

This rebellion on behalf of the real center of American politics needs to be pushed further into the media conversation — and Sanchez's argument on cost controls is an effective wedge that can be used. It neatly splits the Blue Dogs' carefully maintained PR image as budget hawks from the reality of their pro-corporate actions.

It's time to make them choose which is more important — providing affordable healthcare to more Americans, or protecting the profits of the big insurance companies? And if that sounds like the dreaded "class welfare," well, maybe it's time for some of that, too.