Lieberman (I) says no, no, and no on any public option. Hey, they cut him loose. They have nothing to complain about. He isn't beholden to them and he doesn't come up for six years. He does claim to still want a bill, just not one with any configuration of a public option. This makes Snowe and Collins even more critical than they were before. Hmm.
Probe for a catch or caveat in that opposition, and none is visible. Can he support a public option if states could opt out of the plan, as the current bill provides? "The answer is no," he says in an interview from his Senate office. "I feel very strongly about this." How about a trigger, a mechanism for including a public option along with a provision saying it won't be used unless private insurance plans aren't spreading coverage far and fast enough? No again.
Rather, his objection is based on fiscal risk: "Once the government creates an insurance company or plan, the government or the taxpayers are liable for any deficit that government plan runs, really without limit," he says. "With our debt heading over $21 trillion within the next 10 years...we've got to start saying no to some things like this."
Mr. Lieberman also notes that the public option wasn't a big feature of past health-overhaul plans or the campaign debate of 2008. So he says he finds it odd that it now has become a central demand -- which it has, he suspects, because some Democrats wanted a full-bore, single
In the end, he'll vote for whatever they end up calling the public option.
All the Democrats and RINOs will.
They don't think they'll pay for it, either.
Just like they didn't think the gun ban would terminate their careers back in 1993.
They're arrogant Nazis.
Posted by: democratsarefascists | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 at 02:34 PM