| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Obamacare: "Any big agreement is progress, even if we do not know any of the details," |
| 2009-12-12 |
| Our favorite quote of the week comes from Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who was asked about the hazy new deal on health care that was reached Tuesday night by Democratic negotiators and instantly applauded by President Barack Obama. "Any big agreement is progress, even if we do not know any of the details," Casey said Wednesday, according to The New York Times. Details? Who needs details? This is progress! It's clear this is not about the health care. It's about getting 60 votes for any health care bill in the Senate. We know a few details. We're all told that this deal does away with the controversial idea of a government-operated health insurance plan, the "public option." The government instead would contract with private insurers to provide health coverage. The program would be modeled after the health plans available to federal workers. That might be acceptable: Those plans generally earn favorable marks for coverage and efficiency. The benefits are negotiated at market rates and there are incentives for customers to choose less costly alternatives. But whoa, the public option wouldn't really be dead. If private firms didn't deliver suitable coverage, that failure would trigger creation of a government-run insurance program. It's not hard to imagine government officials writing rules that would discourage private companies from offering coverage through the government. Presto -- then the government would step in and start competing with private insurers. Your public option, alive and kicking. There are other big questions about the new deal. It would allow people as young as 55 to buy into Medicare, the federal health program for seniors. Are the senators serious? Medicare pays less to doctors and hospitals than many private health insurers, yet the Medicare program for hospital care will be insolvent in 2017. Medicare's trustees estimated this year that the program faces $37.8 trillion in unfunded obligations over the next 75 years. Sure, let's expand that! So what's this new deal going to cost? Nobody knows yet. Democrats are holding their breath right now until they get a cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. But heck, any deal is progress, even if we don't know what's in it. Right? If you want to know how this new plan is going to fly, keep an eye on Sen. Joe Lieberman, the independent Democrat from Connecticut. A few weeks ago, Lieberman said he wouldn't vote for any health reform bill that had a public option. Period. He also wouldn't vote for any bill that triggered a public option down the road if health reform failed to cover enough people. Lieberman gave a wonderfully frank interview to The Wall Street Journal, which was published last Saturday. He said a number of Democrats and interest groups have told him they see the public option as a back-door way to bring national health care to the U.S. That is, a government-monopoly, single-payer system. And that, justifiably, makes him extremely nervous. "Never in the history of America . . . have we tried to keep one industry honest by having government go into that business to compete with the industry," Lieberman told the Journal. Democrats can't ignore him because they will need 60 votes to thwart an expected Republican filibuster of health-care legislation. Lieberman could be the 60th vote. Lieberman hasn't endorsed or rejected the new proposal, though he said Wednesday he was "encouraged by the progress." He affirmed his strong opposition to a public option. Let's hope he stays firm. |
| Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
| #1 until they look at tort reform ("aaagggghh!@! screamed the trial attys!) and portability across state lines for competition, they aren't looking at reform that works and lowers the costs. It's all about power. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-12-12 02:17 |