During the Senate Finance Committee hearing just now (which we’re liveblogging here), Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) seemed to go farther than he has in the past in opposing a robust public option provision. His line previously had been that public option just doesn’t have the votes in the Senate, but now he’s saying he’s opposed to it on principle.
Late Update: TPM Reader SA has a different read, and one that our reporter Brian Beutler, on the scene in the hearing room, says is closer to the truth of the matter than what I suggested above:
I’ve been watching the Finance Committee hearing today, and reached a very different conclusion than David Kurtz about what Kent Conrad said regarding the public option.He was speaking only about the idea of tying the public option to Medicare costs. Indeed, my reaction was that he was a sending a signal to his fellow Democrats about how they can get support from rural Democrats like him. I thought he left the door more open than he ever has to supporting some form of public option - but not one that would tie its rates to Medicare payments.
More than once, Democrats have found support for a public option among Blue Dog Democrats by compromising on the Medicare pricing, replacing it with the idea that the public option would negotiate for lower costs. It sounded to me like Conrad was saying what it would take to get his support on a public option, not that he was “opposed to it in principle.” He’s only opposed to tying it to Medicare pricing.
David Kurtz
David Kurtz is Managing Editor and Washington Bureau Chief of Talking Points Memo where he oversees the news operations of TPM and its sister sites.