Harry Reid, and What Happened to the Public Option?
First there was Medicare for all 300 million of us. But that was a non-starter because private insurers and Big Pharma wouldn’t hear of it, and Republicans and “centrists” thought it was too much like what they have up in Canada — which, by the way, cost Canadians only 10 percent of their GDP and covers every Canadian. (Our current system of private for-profit insurers costs 16 percent of GDP and leaves out 45 million people.)
So the compromise was to give all Americans the option of buying into a “Medicare-like plan” that competed with private insurers. Who could be against freedom of choice? Fully 70 percent of Americans polled supported the idea. Open to all Americans, such a plan would have the scale and authority to negotiate low prices with drug companies and other providers, and force private insurers to provide better service at lower costs. But private insurers and Big Pharma wouldn’t hear of it, and Republicans and “centrists” thought it would end up too much like what they have up in Canada.
So the compromise was to give the public option only to Americans who wouldn’t be covered either by their employers or by Medicaid. And give them coverage pegged to Medicare rates. But private insurers and … you know the rest.
So the compromise that ended up in the House bill… is to have a mere public option open only to the 6 million Americans not otherwise covered. The Congressional Budget Office warns this shrunken public option will have no real bargaining leverage and would attract mainly people who need lots of medical care to begin with. So it will actually cost more than it saves.
But even the House’s shrunken and costly little public option is too much for private insurers, Big Pharma, Republicans, and “centrists” in the Senate. So Harry Reid has proposed an even tinier public option, which states can decide not to offer their citizens. According to the CBO, it would attract no more than 4 million Americans.
It’s a token public option, an ersatz public option, a fleeting gesture toward the idea of a public option, so small and desiccated as to be barely worth mentioning except for the fact that it still (gasp) contains the word “public.”
And yet Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson mumble darkly that they may not even vote to allow debate on the floor of the Senate about the bill if it contains this paltry public option. And Republicans predict a “holy war.”
But what more can possibly be compromised? Take away the word “public?” Make it available to only twelve people?
Our private, for-profit health insurance system, designed to fatten the profits of private health insurers and Big Pharma, is about to be turned over to … our private, for-profit health care system. Except that now private health insurers and Big Pharma will be getting some 30 million additional customers, paid for by the rest of us.
Upbeat policy wonks and political spinners who tend to see only portions of cups that are full will point out some good things: no pre-existing conditions, insurance exchanges, 30 million more Americans covered. But in reality, the cup is 90 percent empty. Most of us will remain stuck with little or no choice — dependent on private insurers who care only about the bottom line, who deny our claims, who charge us more and more for co-payments and deductibles, who bury us in forms, who don’t take our calls.
I’m still not giving up. I want every Senator who’s not in the pocket of the private insurers or Big Pharma to introduce and vote for a “Ted Kennedy Medicare for All” amendment to whatever bill Reid takes to the floor. And if this fails, a “Ted Kennedy Real Public Option for All” amendment. Let every Senate Democratic who doesn’t have the guts to vote for either of them be known and counted.
right on travis far left verns of the world SOMEONE ELSE PAY FOR IT . WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS .
Actually, Travis & Grate One, the public option we are trying so hard to get would be PREMIUM FUNDED! PREMIUM FUNDED! Understand? Yes, it would be Vern’s public option and whoever else wanted it, because we’d be the ones paying for it!
And that is the very very reasonable request that the insurance companies, Republicans and corporate-whore-democrats-I’m-sorry-“moderates” are fighting so hard against. It’s actually grotesque.
I expect nothing of the Grate One, but Travis you are a bright Fringer who should be able to process this at least.
Travis,
Because the government has great buying and negotiating power and can therefore create the needed dynamic of greater competition within the insurance market, thereby driving down costs.
On a slightly related note (but possibly not worth its own post) what is up with reform opponents’ obsession with anal rape and fisting? I think it was Rachel or Keith last week who presented a lengthy montage – from JUST THE PREVIOUS WEEK – of Rush, Glenn, Savage and other Republican leaders comparing healthcare reform quite explicitly to being raped in the ass… and now I see this anti-reform ad on my online New York Times:
It is something to scratch the head over, analyze… I don’t quite know what to say about it yet.