Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Public Option Is Nothing To Fear
Republican opponents of a public option for US healthcare are defending the insurance industry, not conservative principles
Back in the good old days, the conservatives were the folks who favoured individual choice. Not any more. In the current healthcare debate, the top priority of the so-called conservatives is to deny people choice. They want to make sure that Americans do not have the option to buy into a Medicare-type public healthcare plan. These alleged conservatives have come up with a variety of arguments against allowing people the Medicare-type option, but the only one that makes sense is that they work for the insurance industry.
The argument against a Medicare-type option always begins with the assertion that the government can't do anything. This is a peculiar claim given the popularity of Medicare, but it also makes no sense as an argument against giving people a buy-in option. Suppose the government gives people the option to buy into its really bad plan. Everyone would just stick with the good private plans we have now, right?
The so-called conservatives then tell us that people will end up buying into the bad Medicare-type plan instead of the good private insurance options because the government will subsidise the Medicare-type plan. A little bit of arithmetic is sufficient to dismiss this argument.
How much money would be needed to get people to choose a bad healthcare plan rather than a good one? This would have to involve some serious subsidies. People are not going to sacrifice their health and the health of their families for another cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Suppose it took a subsidy of $1,000 a year to get people to choose the bad Medicare-type plan over the good private sector plans. With a non-Medicare population of more than 250 million, this would imply government subsidies of more than $250bn a year, if the Medicare-type plan was to fully replace private sector plans, as the so-called conservatives warn.
Is it really plausible that Congress will approve $250bn a year in subsidies ($2.5tn over a 10-year budget window) for a Medicare-type plan that everyone thinks is awful? Is there another altogether wasteful programmes that gets public subsidies even one-tenth of this size?
This one just doesn't pass the laugh test. If conservative politicians don't think they can prevent such an enormous waste of taxpayer dollars being perpetuated year after year for the indefinite future, they should probably consider another line of work.
In short, there is no genuine conservative argument against allowing people the option of buying into a Medicare-type plan. If the plan proves to be inferior to private insurance plans, as is often argued, then the consequences will be relatively minor. Some number of people who choose to sign up with this plan will find that they don't like it, and then will switch to a better alternative. In time, a bad public plan will soon flounder, since few people will buy into it. There may be some effort to provide subsidies to even a bad public plan, but it is not plausible that the subsidies could be large enough to displace private plans.
It is also clear that the opposition to a Medicare-type public plan does not stem from townhall-type mass opposition. A recent New York Times poll found that by an overwhelming majority, 65% to 26%, the public favours giving people this option. If there is a member of Congress that risks defeat by supporting a public plan, it is not because of their constituents' views.
The opposition to a Medicare-type option is not based on public sentiment or the fear that the plan will be bad. Rather the opposition is based on the fear that the plan will be good and that people will choose to buy into it. This will cost the insurance industry tens of billions of dollars in profit over the next decade and could mean the end of big paycheques for the industry's CEO's and other high-level executives.
But the people who oppose giving the public the opportunity to buy into a Medicare-type plan should not be called conservatives. Honest conservatives would have no objection to giving the public a choice. The people who oppose a Medicare-type plan are doing the bidding of the insurance industry - there is no conservative principle at stake. And we all know what Joe Wilson has to say about people like that.
- Posted in
12 Comments so far
Show AllIt is the Democrats who are more the problem about getting a public option passed into a health care law. The health care industry has successfully bought up both sides of the congressional aisle. Even the progressive stalwarts in congress are saying that the cause is lost save getting a rider in allowing the states to pursue single-payer plans. I am rather tired of seeing columns tarring the Republicans only for the lack of of congressional enthusiasm for a public option. Both parties are to blame, and the President also.
Truth will out, won't it? Excellent comment.
Unfortunately, there is too much truth in Alanak's response.
But, putting aside political parties for the moment, if we consider the opposition as simply "obstructionists," they can be very clever when it comes to blurting out snappy comebacks for any argument. As I've mentioned in previous posts, the area where I live is notoriously "un-progressive." At social gatherings, I find it fascinating to listen to the obstructionists' "logic" for opposing, well, anything that might benefit the average individual. You will NEVER out-debate them.
The author seems to be trying to make the point that Congress would never allocate such a huge expenditure for a "bad" program. The obstructionists would counter that by claiming, "This has never stopped Congress before!". Furthermore, the obstructionists would argue that you cannot label a program as a success simply because it's overused. They insist that consumers are not insurance experts, and they will stampede into a significantly "badder" program --even if it's only slightly less expensive.
As a reminder to the other participants here, I favor a public option (at the very least), but ultimately, single payer is the best solution. However, the obstructionists are very stubborn, and I believe that they're much more common than a handful of crazies who disrupt town-hall meetings.
Nobody can out-debate the obstructionists' talking points that, after having been bantered about for two decades are considered urban legends by people with critical thinking skills and are considered facts by the rest of the US electorate.
The whole thing has been so badly handled that if someone were to tell me they had evidence that the president and the Democrats never wanted real medical care reform, I would not be surprised. Bill Maher is correct that the term "public option" sounds like a restroom, and "Medicare For All" would have had a chance of garnering public support. The hysterical finger pointing and yelling out "Socialized medicine!" has given the right wingers the chance to revive the old "Commie Pinko" attack that was their mainstay during most of the 20th century, particularly during the cold war. That could have been forseen. I saw it coming, but all I do is post on this site and Democratic Underground, and nobody listens to me.
I think it was handled exactly the way they wanted to handle it: sabotage it from the beginning.
Funny, they never have a problem when it comes to anyone else outside the citizenry. Money, Mr. Bank? Sure! Money Mr. Big Automaker? How much do you want!? Money Mr. Wall Street & Big Financial? Of course! Money Mr. Big Pharma? Will this wheelbarrow full do!?
With the stroke of a pen, they write checks and start wars seemingly overnight. (In some cases, we all know it IS overnight.)
"That could have been forseen. I saw it coming, but all I do is post on this site and Democratic Underground, and nobody listens to me.'
Uh...me too! :)
This is all by design. If you take a look at the polls, most Americans say they prefer a single payer system, and 87% of Democrats! Democrats have a majority, they can pass single payer ... but they'd rather pretend that the MINORITY that are opposed to it have to be coddled.
It's a scam. We should push and push for single payer. It's the best system, most of us want it. How can we sit by and allow them to do this to people?
Baker here propagates an irresponsible MSM propaganda virus. He carelessly tosses around the term "Medicare-like" public option as though there were some such proposal on the table. But there is NO such plan being proposed in ANY bill in either house; the phrase is a comforting mirage for centrist liberals who are queasy about pushing for single payer but have no idea how anemic--and how UN-Medicare-like--the actual Demcocratic pub-op proposals are.
For a brief history and analysis, see the following, by Bruce Dixon of the Black Agenada report:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=print/content/why-public-option-doomed-fail-and-what-can-be-done-about-it
For a more thorough history and analysis of the history and fate of the public option, see these three articles by Kip Sullivan of Physicians for a National Health Plan:
1. "Bait and Switch: How the Public Option Was Sold"
http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/20/bait-and-switch-how-the-%E2%80%9Cpublic-option%E2%80%9D-was-sold/
2. "Does the Congressional Progressive Caucus Care About Its Progressive Principles?"
http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/28/does-the-congressional-progressive-caucus-care-about-its-public-option-principles/
3. Reply to Critics
http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/08/08/reply-to-critics-of-%E2%80%9Cbait-and-switch-how-the-%E2%80%98public-option%E2%80%99-was-sold%E2%80%9D/
I'm not afraid of the public option. I just think it's half-assed. USP is so much simpler and way more ethical.
Yeah...Republicans have nothing to fear...because the public option was written (for Baucus) by the insurance industry...it won't be a threat AT ALL..because it will be ineffective, be exclusive, unaffordable, worthless and therefore meaningless and will fail.
Hey...Democrats are on board....why not the Republicans too? They are both bought by insurance, pharm industries...no difference!!!
Ugh...please...this author should be shot!! Or at the very least not published in Commondreams.org
The Defence of Privilage Act.
Health care is only for filthy rich white men.
Everyone else must toil, suffer and die in poverty.
The argument that the government can't do anything well was, unfortunately, also furthered by Obama, when he dissed the USPS. As I recall, it wasn't just a gaffe and it wasn't done just once. Furthermore, I can't remember the last time Obama came up to bat for the way Medicare is run, or the VA. This is a huge problem, when you have the President, a Democrat, disparaging government-run entities -- unless it's the military industrial complex.
I take comfort in the fact that I am an Independent, more so now than ever before. I used to say that I align with the principles of the Democratic Party, but after this last election, and the to-date experience of Obama as President, I have no idea what the principles of the Democratic Party are.
Personally I think Obama will sign anything that's put before him, but I think he is hoping and praying for a plan without a Medicare-type public option. I hate being this cynical.