I seem to have missed it. There's several diaries on the rec list, and one front page post to the effect that the President is backing off the public option. I don't buy it at all. Follow me over the fold and let's lee if the sky isn't still up there after all.
First off, the President hasn't said anything about backing off on the public option. He only said there are other things in the reform package that are important too. These things are bigger winners for us with independents and conservative dems, so it makes sense to shift the conversation there. Let's talk about what we can agree on, and leave the contentious things for a vote in Congress, where we're likely to win, because if we get the conservadems on our side for things like ending rescission and lifetime caps, they'll help us break a filibuster, and the Public Option has all the votes it needs to pass both houses if the Senate can get past the (almost guaranteed) filibuster attempt.
Also, and here's where I may lose some of you, these things are just as important as the public option! Without a robust public option, HCR fails. But without some of these protections for the already insured, HCR fails too. And we can't forget that. This is about more than the public option, this is about reform, and the public option is just one part of that. It's an important part, for me (and I think for the President) it's a non-negotiable part, but it's just one part.
Lastly, this gives us a great opportunity to turn the conversation around. And now I give you an original vignette: Scenes from a Townhall
Wingnut: Obamacare is Socialism! Socialism Bad! Free Markets good! RAAAWR!
Sane Person: Ok, so let's not talk about the public option right now. How about the rest of the pacage? How do you feel about ending rescission? Do you think it's good that the bill will prevent your insurance company from dropping you if you get really sick?
Wingnut: Well, yeah, I guess that's ok...
Sane Person: And how about ending lifetime caps? There's no cap on what you pay in, so why should there be a cap on your benefits. Remember, buying insurance is basically betting against yourself and giving the insurance company odds, so when the bet pays off, why should they be allowed to back out of their obligations?
Wingnut: Uhhhh, that makes sense I guess
Sane Person: Well then, given that the "free market" approach has given us both of these atrocities, maybe the public option wouldn't be so bad if it's not mandatory, and these reforms get passed with it?
[There is a loud pop as a paradigm shifts without a clutch, and the wingnut vanishes in a puff of logic]
fin
Or something like that.
Best Wishes,
Dudley
PS: I think that's just rain. The sky isn't really falling.