Senate Dems Ditch the Public Option

Senate Dems Ditch the Public Option

When President Obama spoke to members of Congress the other day about the need to enact health-care reform he conveniently forgot to mention the public option.

Senate Democrats got the message.

Their negotiators struck a tentative agreement Tuesday night to eliminate the “public option” — the controversial but necessary plan to set up government-run insurance program to provide competition (and an incentive to hold down costs) for private insurers.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

When President Obama spoke to members of Congress the other day about the need to enact health-care reform he conveniently forgot to mention the public option.

Senate Democrats got the message.

Their negotiators struck a tentative agreement Tuesday night to eliminate the “public option” — the controversial but necessary plan to set up government-run insurance program to provide competition (and an incentive to hold down costs) for private insurers.

The negotiators tried to ease the blow to the hopes of progressive reformers by agreeing to an initiative that would create a number of national insurance policies that would be developed by the federal Office of Personnel Management, which oversees health policies for federal workers, but administered by private firms.

If the private firms fail to do an adequate job, the Senate bill calls for establishment of a genuine public option.

More significantly, the Senate bill proposes to drop the Medicare eligibility rate to 55, a move that would permit millions of Americans to buy into the immensely popular federal program for retirees.

These are not inconsequential steps. Nor are the new regulations of insurance companies that are contained in the Senate bill, which Democrats leaders now believe they have a genuine chance of passing — perhaps even gaining a Republican vote, that of Maine’s Olympia Snowe. (But both Snowe are Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman have expressed reservations about dropping the Medicare eligibility age.)

But the loss of the public option remains a bitter pill — especially for progressives who want to expand access to health care and hold down the costs that are run up by insurance company profiteering.

Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold lodged the most serious objection, saying he would not “support proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with a purely private approach.”

“We need to have some competition for the insurance industry to keep rates down and save taxpayer dollars,” said Feingold. “I will base my vote on the bill on the entirety of what is in the bill, and whether I think the bill is good for Wisconsin.”

Feingold is not alone in his concerns although, as usual, he is the more willing than most senators to stand on his own against the leadership.

Where does this leave us?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s still got some serious cajoling to do if he plans to pass a bill before the Holiday break.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x