Public health option has lots of options

WASHINGTON, Oct. 15 (UPI) -- Inter- and intra-party debate is heating up in the U.S. Congress on whether to have a public option in healthcare reform and, if so, what it will look like.

Now that reform measures have passed out of five House and Senate committees -- three in the House and two in the Senate -- the focus shifted to reconciling elements of the bills into ones each chamber can consider. Among the matters to be considered is what form the public option -- demanded by liberal Democrats and chastised by Republicans -- would take.

When the Senate Finance Committee passed its version Tuesday, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, was the lone Republican to side with all committee Democrats. However, she said she was moving to advance the discussion, not the bill.

She favors a trigger option that would establish a government-run plan in states where at least 5 percent of residents can't access affordable care. -- an idea that's generating a lot of buzz, The New York Times reported Thursday.

Two senior administration officials said the White House is looking favorably on the Snowe plan, while liberals argue Snowe is gaining undue influence over the talks.

"It's one vote. She won't make the commitment on the final product, and she says she's got to have the trigger," said Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, D- Ariz., who heads the House effort to secure votes for a government plan similar to Medicare. "I think the administration has put her in the driver's seat; it's very disconcerting."

Because public health coverage has split the Democrats, several compromises are being floated, such as non-profit cooperatives in the Senate Finance Committee bill and letting states decide whether they want to participate in a public option, another discussion point gathering steam among centrist Democrats, the Times said.