Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Joe Lieberman's B.S. Justifications for Opposing the Public Option

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 5:00 PM on October 27, 2009.


Here's how Lieberman's B.S. has evolved.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

OK, so Joe Lieberman would rather see health care reform fail than allow some consumers to have a choice between public and private coverage. But one of the key clues to an unprincipled mind is an evolving explanation for opposition.

In June, Lieberman said, "I don't favor a public option because I think there's plenty of competition in the private insurance market." That didn't make sense, and it was quickly dropped from his talking points.

In July, Lieberman said he opposes a public option because "the public is going to end up paying for it." No one knew what that meant.

In August, he said we'd have to wait "until the economy's out of recession," which is incoherent, since a public option, even if passed this year, still wouldn't kick in for quite a while.

In September, Lieberman said he opposes a public option because "the public doesn't support it." A wide variety of credible polling proved otherwise.

Which brings us to October, and the latest in a series of weak explanations.

"We're trying to do too much at once," Lieberman said. "To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don't think we need it now." [...]

Lieberman said that he'd vote against a public option plan "even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line."

 

Jon Chait explained that this "literally makes no sense whatsoever. A public plan does not provide a new entitlement. It just doesn't. It's a different form of providing an entitlement. Nor is it more expensive. In fact, the stronger versions of the public plan would cost less money. Lieberman is just babbling nonsense here."

Not that it matters -- it's almost November, which means Lieberman will have some equally unpersuasive argument very soon.

Digg!

Tagged as: lieberman, health reform, public option

Steve Benen is "blogger in chief" of the popular Washington Monthly online blog, Political Animal. His background includes publishing The Carpetbagger Report, and writing for a variety of publications, including Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, the Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has also appeared on NPR's "Talk of the Nation," MSNBC's "Rachel Maddow Show," Air America Radio's "Sam Seder Show," and XM Radio's "POTUS '08."


Conservative Bishop Denies Kennedy His Holy Cracker*
Is God cool with us picking and choosing Her teachings?
Post by Joshua Holland. November 23, 2009.
Christian Rappers Demand 'Christian Side Hugs': 'I'm a Rough Rider, Filled With Christ's Love!'
Christian side hugs for everyone!
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 23, 2009.
The Most Racist Sheriff in America's Worst Nightmare: Meet Salvador Reza (Video)
THe Air Force veteran, community organizer and immigrants rights activist, joins Laura for an exclusive interview on Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s ongoing mistreatment of his community.
Post by Laura Flanders. November 23, 2009.
Advertisement
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?