Yesterday, I asked the question about whether members of the House progressive caucus might vote "no" on a health care bill that emerges from the insurance industry-driven rollback on the promise of a public option. That is becoming more real today after concessions to the "Blue Dogs" in the House further weakened the public option:

But some of the concessions to Blue Dogs set off a revolt among members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who said they feared that the public insurance plan was being weakened.

“We do not support this,” said Representative Lynn Woolsey, Democrat of California, co-chairwoman of the progressive caucus. “It’s a nonstarter.”

   Not surprisingly, support for the president’s approach is weakning, at least according to two polls. The first, via The Wall Street Journal:

Support for President Barack Obama’s health-care effort has declined over the past five weeks, particularly among those who already have insurance, a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found, amid prolonged debate over costs and quality of care.

In mid-June, respondents were evenly divided when asked whether they thought Mr. Obama’s health plan was a good or bad idea. In the new poll, conducted July 24-27, 42% called it a bad idea while 36% said it was a good idea.

   The second, via The New York Times:

Americans are concerned that revamping the health care system would reduce the quality of their care, increase their out-of-pocket health costs and tax bills, and limit their options in choosing doctors, treatments and tests, the poll found. The percentage who describe health care costs as a serious threat to the American economy — a central argument made by Mr. Obama — has dropped over the past month.

Mr. Obama continues to benefit from strong support for the basic goal of revamping the health care system, and he is seen as far more likely than Congressional Republicans to have the best ideas to accomplish that. But reflecting a problem that has hindered efforts to bring major changes to health care for decades, Americans expressed considerable unease about what the end result would mean for them individually.

   This was inevitable. Once the president, and a large segment of the Democratic Party, essentially pushed single-payer to the margins and declared it not a serious alternative, the insurance industry, and the "free market" ideologues, captured the debate, turning the discussion into a questions about the cost to the government and  whether taxes should be raised to cover people. It is astonishing that the top one percent of income earners are able to be portrayed as somehow under assault by the notion that should pay a bit more in dues to make sure we have a functioning society. But, no one is really willing to take that on.

   Of course, we would not have that problem with single-payer because it would save somewhere between $300-$400 billion A YEAR in costs.

   Stay tuned.