The Optional Option

It's like trying to grab a handful of Jell-O.

The great American health care debate has become slippery, gooey and a little slimy, an amorphous collection of proposals that may or may not become law and that the president may or may not defend.

The latest kerfuffle over the "public option" illustrates the semi-liquid consistency of this concoction. If you've listened to Obama in recent months, he has never quite solidified his desire for a government-run insurance plan to compete with the Aetnas of the world. But after he made conciliatory noises about the public option at town hall meetings, and Kathleen Sebelius and Robert Gibbs stressed the need for competition--not necessarily government-managed competition--on the Sunday shows, the signal was pretty clear. Or not. ("Bottom line" should be "choice and competition," Gibbs said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "Not the essential element," Sebelius said on CNN's "State of the Union," which includes my program.)

I've assumed all along that the White House viewed the public option as a bargaining chip: nice to have, but something that could be traded for minimal Republican support. Once Kent Conrad started talking up co-op plans--another neither-fish-nor-fowl dish--you could smell the aroma of a face-saving compromise.

Still, had the administration backed off? Look at the gelatinous nature of these exchanges between reporters and the White House press secretary:

Q Just to be completely clear, has anything changed on the public option?

MR. GIBBS: No. I challenge you guys all to go back and see what we've said about this over the course of many, many, many, many months, and you'll find a boring consistency to our rhetoric.

Q The rhetoric, as you say, might be consistent, but the movement on the ground, so to speak, toward legislation hasn't been. Is there any recognition now that a public option is looking less likely to be part of a final deal?

MR. GIBBS: Let me make sure I understand your question, because I want to know if it's -- is this predicated on legislative developments since Congress has been out of session, or are we trying to match the stampede of a series of stories to if not the consistent language that we've all been saying to some now legislative vote?

Q It's just looking more and more likely that a public option is not going to be part of the final bill. I'm wondering if the White House is --

MR. GIBBS: I do think -- can I just -- I want to point out the -- how do I phrase this -- massive irony that I don't know that I saw any of your stories denote the fact that this might be -- that you're surmising now this was a political reality rather than --

Q That's what we're asking.