There are a handful of Senate Democrats who could seriously damage the odds of passing of a public option included version of a health care reform bill. That includes even the watered down public option "opt out" version just passed by the Senate Finance Committee. These senators, who refer to themselves as "moderates", have signaled they will either vote no on the bill and, in at least one case, join Republicans in a filibuster attempt. This despite repeated polls showing widespread and overwhelming public support for the public option and CBO estimates that the public option will not only be deficit neutral but, in fact, reduce the deficit.
One of the senators expected to vote no on the Senate bill including a public option is Indiana's Evan Bayh. And if there was ever a contest to assess the biggest single conflict of interest in the Senate, Mr. Bayh might win the gold.
(Sen. Bayh's) wife, Susan Bayh, sits on the board of WellPoint in her hometown of Indianapolis. Over the last six years, Susan Bayh has received at least $2 million in compensation from WellPoint alone for serving on its board.
She joined Anthem Insurance (the precursor organization to WellPoint) in 1998, when she was 38 years old and a midlevel attorney working for Eli Lilly... Her work background at the time she was appointed to the Anthem board would have been surprising, given that she had no insurance experience and was relatively young and inexperienced to serve as a director on a multibillion-dollar board.
However, Susan Bayh had one competitive advantage that made her stand out as attractive to Anthem: She was married to Evan Bayh -- former governor of Indiana who, in 1998, was elected to the U.S. Senate. (Link)
Look, it may be that Evan Bayh won't allow his wife's work (and compensation) from the second largest private health insurance company in the United States to influence his vote on a public option. But that potential for conflict can't be ignored either.
Judges, from the Supreme Court on down, are expected to recuse themselves when called to oversee a trial that includes some potential conflict of interest for them. It doesn't seem unreasonable that Senators and Representatives would be expected to do likewise when asked to vote on a bill that includes a conflict.
Or maybe there would be no one left to vote.
Comments