The Public Option ISN’T Dead Yet
Conservatives and independents are rejoicing that the White House has waved the white flag on the public option. I’m not one of them because I’m convinced that the only thing that’s happened is that the term public option has been retired. Here’s why I think that:
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is “not the essential element” of the administration’s health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory.
Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.
With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.“I think there will be a competitor to private insurers,” Sebelius said. “That’s really the essential part, is you don’t turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing.”
When I read that HHS Secretary Sebelius said that it’s likely that “there will be a competitor to private insurers”, I knew that the Obama administration had gotten negative results from focus groups on that term. I’m betting that they’ve got a new term for public option that’s gotten better focus group results.
If we want to win this debate, it’s important that we highlight the Democrats’ next attempt at single-payer. It’s also important that we insist that H.R. 3200 be scrapped, along with the Baucus bill and the Kennedy-Dodd legislation. The premise for the Democrats’ health care reform legislation has been faulty from the outset.
They’ve talked almost exclusively about insuring everyone. To do that, their plans have sacrificed quality and affordability while ignoring innovation and flexibility. Why hasn’t the Democratic Congress written legislation based on using the tax code for helping people buy their own insurance? Why hasn’t the Democratic Congress written legislation that eliminates counterproductive mandates like letting people buy insurance from any company in the United States? Why have they written legislation that forces single men to buy health insurance policies that include maternity benefits and well-baby and well-child care coverage?
There’s no question but that the public option was disastrous policy. Nonetheless, that’s only one piece of disastrous policy contained in the Democrats’ health takeover legislation. It’s important that we kill the other counterproductive portions of the Democrats’ legislation.
The Devil’s In The Details
Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, called the argument for a government-run public plan little more than a “wasted effort.” He added there are enough votes in the Senate for a cooperative plan.
“It’s not government-run and government-controlled,” he said. “It’s membership-run and membership-controlled. But it does provide a nonprofit competitor for the for-profit insurance companies, and that’s why it has appeal on both sides.”
Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said Obama’s team is making a political calculation and embracing the co-op alternative as “a step away from the government takeover of the health care system” that the GOP has pummeled. “I don’t know if it will do everything people want, but we ought to look at it. I think it’s a far cry from the original proposals,” he said.
Sen. Shelby, here’s the advice I’ll give you: Pay attention to the details. This Democratic majority is composed of control freaks. I suspect that they’ll attempt to use co-ops as a vehicle to reintroduce the public option sometime in the near future. I don’t have a problem with taking a look at the co-op option as long as we stay situationally alert.
Technorati Tags: Reform, Health Care, Public Option, Co-Ops, Kathleen Sebelius, President Obama, Ted Kennedy, Christopher Dodd, Max Baucus, Focus Groups, Mandates, Kent Conrad, Democrats, Richard Shelby, Republicans
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
August 16th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Non-profit? Yeah, right.
The way “non-profits” work is that the person who started it gives themselves an extremely high paying salary and benefits, pays their workers crap and treats them the same, and they constantly beg, borrow, and steal money to stay in operation.
A few years ago in San Francisco, the President of a non-profit lost her job for remodeling her kitchen with non-profit funds. The next one took a trip to Hawaii using non-profit funds while they were under investigation for the last one.
For a moment, I thought the Bush Administration would turn its sights on non-profit fraud, but they let it pass. Non-profits are as big a problem as Enron. ACORN is all the evidence you need for that.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Why is everyone, Democrat and Republican alike, ignoring the elephant in the room while chasing butterfly changes that have nothing to do with the real problems of runaway costs in the health care/insurance industries?
Why should a major portion of the cost of my office visit to my GP go toward paying for his insurances? Why, if the hospital I go to screws up, are they protected legally more than I? And the list of real problems goes on and on.
Oh, I forgot. Laws are there to protect people, and since laws are written for the most part by lawyers (locally, regionally and nationally), and lawyers are people, too, then they are naturally written to protect their own most important member group. How silly of me to forget.
Until they get to the point of actually addressing the problems, I will be against any “fix” anyone comes up with ’cause it ain’t gonna “fix” anything and it will continue to steal more of my hard-earned money.