Aargh. You don't need 60 votes to pass a bill. The bill doesn't need 60 votes to pass. It just needs 60 votes to end debate and get to a vote.

Blue Dogs and other conservatives (in both chambers) would be put to the test -- they say they want a cheaper, more fiscally responsible reform plan that emphasizes choice and competition. Do they mean it?

Corrupt politicians for $200, Alex.

Answer. Members of the 111th U.S. Congress vote against including a public option in any health care reform bill sighting fiscal responsibility as a chief concern, despite evidence to the contrary.

Alex, who are the Blue Dogs and conservative members of the Senate?

Correct.

Corrupt politicians for $300.......

in re Pelosi: I'm glad SOMEBODY is channeling LBJ. . .

Wow, Nancy Pelosi is starting to make me believe that she's seriously going to fight for a PO.

Keep it up!

Count me in favor of the House passing a strong, and fiscally responsible, public option while the Senate passes a strong opt-out public option. Both bills then have the right language in them, giving the public and the Democrats the kind of reform bill that Obama campaigned on last year.

shorter Max Baucus:
"We of teh US Senate Clown Car will always disappoint the American people -- you can count on it! It's just a matter of how much we sell out..."

"She (Pelosi) intends to get different CBO scores for different versions of reform, and then, if all goes according to plan, highlight the fact that the bill with the public option is cheaper."

In other words she plans to waste taxpayer dollars getting the CBO to analyze hypothetical "what ifs".

This is a new low in wasteful spending.

That was beautiful, Al. I know many others here don't appreciate you. But I do, guy.

"Blue Dogs and other conservatives (in both chambers) would be put to the test -- they say they want a cheaper, more fiscally responsible reform plan that emphasizes choice and competition. Do they mean it?"

Oh, Steve, your faux naivete is just so delightful!

And what shortstop said -- Al, you ROCK!

Call me a Pollyanna (if only I were that powerful, all she had to do was show up and everything came out wonderfully) but Baucus's comments may contain more cause for optimism that you might think:

1. This is Max Baucus talking -- if he says its still alive, its probably still part of the conversation at least.

2. We already know there will be a public option in the House bill. If a "public option", any "public option", survives in the Senate bill, then we know we will get something that will be tagged a "public option."

3. Once that hurdle has been passed, the final shape of the public option will be left to the conferees -- which will include members of the House selected by Pelosi, a strong public option supporter. In other words the conference will of necessity be decidely more progressive than the current cabal of Reid-Dodd-Baucus. This will give the House the ability to make the final version of the "public option" stronger than whatever passes the Senate.

It may not be ideal, but once a public option gets established, there will be opportunities to strenghen it down the road, just as Medicare was strengthened over the years.

If I worked as hard as these people do every day to produce such a knowingly inferior product, I would be unemployed.

I think we're going to be seeing why Nancy Pelosi rose to be Speaker of the House, and why most real Democrats chose her to be there.
Notice the difference--a real Democrat from a reliably blue state and district is chosen as the Dem leader in the House. We get what appears to be a real reform bill.
A DINO from a red/unreliably blue state containing less than 2% of the population is chosen to be leader in the Senate(with a similar DINO running the Finance Committee). We get a piece of crap bill written to please the insurance industry and endless delays trying to get the support of Republicans who want nothing but to kill reform.
The contrast has never been more stark. Thankfully, it doesn't appear that Pelosi will back down, and real Dems in the Senate are on her side putting pressure on Reid and Baucus.

IDIOTS we have in the Senate! IDIOTS. We do NOT need 60 votes to get the public option. Period. All we need is a bill to be passed and then, in RECONCILIATION you add the public option to bring the senate bill in line with the objectively superior House version.

Done. No muss, no fuss, and no GOP OR Blue-shit Dogs.

Well, I like Pelosi's strategery here, and I also hope it is coupled with a behind-closed-doors warning that, whatever is in the Senate bill, any Democratic Senator who chooses to stand with Republicans and not allow the most important domestic policy initiative of Obama's presidency to proceed to a vote WILL face a primary challenger with the full financial backing of the DNC next time around.

A public option for ONLY those who cannot afford thiefy private insurance will NOT help drive down costs and will NOT compete with private criminal insurance. It will be operating in its own limited universe and those who are judged able to "afford" private insurance will be required to do so and those same criminal syndicate companies WILL be free (and will) increase costs.

The public option must be open to all takers. PARTICULARLY if there is a requirement to buy coverage. Anything else is merely criminal action on the part of the government to force the people to provide profits and CEO bonuses to private criminal insurance companies! I will NOT obey such a law that REQUIRES that I fun CEO bonuses, golf junkets, whoring junkets, and denied claims and dropped coverage!

I agree Praedor, and if it isn't a real public option the Dems will go down in flames. I hope that WashPost paper with the poll numbers was laying on the table when the Senators met this morning.
They have the public on their side, now they have to decide if they're going to represent their constituents or stick with the insurance industry. We're all watching and taking names.

Trying hard to hold on to a little HOPE...would love to be wrong abut Reid, Baucus, Dodd as I find them all the worst examples of an entrenched group of repeat Congress people who work harder for their own careers than they actually do for the benefit of "the people"...most of all I'd love for things to end up so that there will be EGG all over the faces of the paid for pundits out there...

The only option to a public plan that should be under consideration should be joining every other country with a universal health care system down the lines of what we are proposing: no for-profit basic health insurance companies.
Nancy should add some CBO comparisons on drug prices also. We would save billions by junking the secret Obama cave-in to big pharma. And likewise reforming Medicare drug benefit while we're at it. Republicans: want to save money? Here's how.