Right now, there is a scenario that is being heavily promoted. It has several themes. These themes are as follows. 1) The Public Option is the darling of the far left. 2) The Public Option can never attain the necessary support to pass in the Senate. 3) Co-ops are a reasonable compromise which are closer to the mood of the country. 4) The President and the Democratic leadership will be for the Public Option right up to the point where they must abandon it due to political realities. 5) The progressives will whine and moan, but eventually fall into line. The upshot is there will be no Public Option. There are a lot of people who want this scenario to appear inevitable. I've seen several analyses by the usual suspects that follow these themes. I think we have to create an alternative scenario that appears equally reasonable but results in the passage of legislation which includes the Public Option. To that end, I feel the best alternative is to point out the Public Option deserves a vote.
Realize it or not, this one is already in the hands of the jury. And for the Public Option the jury is the Congress. The arguments have been made, and now it's all about political calculations and gamesmenship. The congresspeople know where their constituents stand, they know what their options are, and now they are making the political calculations. As is often the case, many members of congress are looking for the easiest way out. Those members who are beholden to the insurance industry are most desirous of of a graceful exit, preferably in the form of healthcare reform legislation without a public option. The aforementioned scenario is very appealing to this group.
It seems to me the best way to foil this scenario is to use a legal strategy. Offer the jury a lesser charge. Instead of limiting the juries choice to first degree murder or acquittal, we offer manslaughter also. The public option deserves a vote, that's not much to ask. We've already heard Kent Conrad say he doesn't support the Public Option because it doesn't have the votes to pass in the Senate. I think we win if we get a vote. Put a bill before the House and Senate that includes a Public Option, don't filibuster it, and let the chips fall where they may. We make the simple act of getting a vote on the Public Option the issue, not the Public Option itself.
Many of the Democrats who are looking for a way to avoid a difficult vote have tried to say the issue is not the Public Option, but the unlikelihood of its passage. In that regard, we cannot allow the Public Option to jeopardize overall healthcare reform legislation. We turn the argument on its head. What would be the easiest way to move the legislation forward? All we want is an up or down vote on the Public Option, we are jeopardizing nothing. We are drawing a roadmap with directions to a resolution. We counter the conventional scenario with a better scenario.