One of the most puzzling things about Sen. Joe Lieberman's opposition to the public option is that he says it's based in a belief that a new government "entitlement" will end up being a large burden on taxpayers. In fact, the public option will be paid into (i.e. not subsidized like an entitlement) and the vast consensus among experts, partisan and non-partisan, is that a public option will save the government lots of loot. Moreover, they conclude that the bigger the plan is, the more money it will save.
Read More →
Yesterday, I asked Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Lieberman's Connecticut colleague Chris Dodd (D-CT) what they thought of Lieberman's backward thinking.
Singing the praises of her preferred 'trigger' solution, Snowe said "[triggers] obviously can have a maximum impact...certainly, not as comparable to a full public option and what they want, but on the other hand what you're doing with the public option is basically crowding out the private sector, because of the government's, you know, inordinate advantage in the market place."