Roy v. Claire on the "Constrained" Public Option

"Didn't seem to me to make sense"

Congressman Roy Blunt said Sen. Claire McCaskill's definition of a "constrained" public option "didn't make sense" and that any sort of government plan would hurt the private insurance market.

*WATCH THE ROY-CLAIRE NOTEBOOK MISHMASH ABOVE*

During her two townhalls in the Ozarks Monday, McCaskill repeatedly made the point that she would only vote for a government option in healthcare if it was "constrained".

"If it was constrained and limited to how much help it could get from the government and it was clear to me, it would be allowed to compete in an unfettered fashion with other private companies, I'd vote yes. If it wasn't constrained, I'd vote no," McCaskill said.

Asked about how to "constrain" it, McCaskill replied, "You constrain it by how much money it gets from the government, you constrain it by the underwriting rules . . ."

PLUS: HOW MANY BLUNT TOWNHALLS HAVE YOU ATTENDED?

Boasts of "lots" of forums and town halls in the Ozarks during August

"I did two telephone townhalls that had thousands of people participating . . . My guess is, in those telephone townhalls I answered more questions than anybody did in the kind of townhalls we saw here."

AND . . . IS CLAIRE REALLY TO RISK HER RE-ELECT ON HEALTHCARE?

Asked if she would lose re-election this year if she was running, McCaskill replied, "I don't know"

"One of the reasons we got problems in Washington is everyone gets more focused on re-elected than solving problems."