A Strong Defense of the Public Option, and Active Government
By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne today gives one of the more concise, effective rebuttals I've seen to the notion that a public option would destroy private healthcare, and specifically the idea voiced by GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa that government is a "predator."
Grassley was then forced to explain how he felt about Medicare. Is it predatory for government to pay health bills for the elderly? Is Social Security, which lives side by side with private pension and savings plans, predatory? Is it predatory for government to regulate, well, predatory lenders or stock swindlers or bank boodlers?
Democrats have been far too timid in taking on the right wing's arguments against government. They have been defensive when they should be going on offense by insisting that government can expand human freedom and give people options they would not otherwise have.
Consider universal K-12 education, loans and grants to help students attend college, clean water systems, and unemployment compensation so people can get by while they look for the next job. A public insurance option lies squarely within this American tradition of using government to open new avenues of choice and opportunity.
Preach, brother Dionne! There are legitimate questions about a public option—how, for example it would be constructed to prevent employers from dropping their own health coverage and dumping everyone onto the government plan—but he's right that Democrats have become far too accepting of the premise that activist government is ipso facto a problem.
- Check out our political cartoons.
- Become a political insider: Subscribe to U.S. News Weekly, our digital magazine.
- Follow Robert Schlesinger on Twitter.
Tags: healthcare
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (24) | Print
Reader Comments
For Everyone
Health coverage for everyone is not an unattainable goal nor should be a threat to those too afraid to take action in a time of change. Health insurance premiums are have gone up and average of 125% in a decade. This is above and beyond the rate of inflation in the country. How can anyone, even with existing employer funded coverage afford coverage? In the current trend insurance would be likely to go up a minimum of 305 in another five years.
No matter what strategy we use in health care reform, great focus needs to be placed upon procedural costs. There is no stability within the industry.
Dr. Stephen Kardos offers the best summation, "Not-for-profit or for-profit health insurance programs must first change the acceleration of medical expenses caused by the poor quality of proactive (preventive) health management by patients and physicians. Changing administrative venues or administrative expense ratios (the government touts how low their administrative expenses are compared to private insurance) isn’t going to change the medical expenses trend. In fact, a higher administrative to premium ratio will occur as medical claims decrease when better preventive proactive health is practiced." http://www.ourblook.com/component/option,com_sectionex/Itemid,200076/id,8/view,category/#catid107
Well irene
Your anecdotal story is very stirring. And entirely irrelevant. The vast majority of Americans who have health insurance wouldn't "loose everything". And I'm sure you're very grateful that your niece got the operations she needed to survive, probably a procedure developed and refined by an American health care system looking for a way to save lives AND make money. My wife, who is pregnant with our first, has paid exactly $100 for her prenatal care which is all we will have to pay for this HIGH RISK pregnancy thanks to her insurance coverage. And we, too, are getting excellent care from our ares premier university hospital. And I have Canadian and British friends who loath the UKs socialist health care system. I'm just curious about your opinion on the dichotomy of a system which is capable of giving a 14 year old girl breast augmentation (a cosmetic procedure) while making a 55 year old woman wait for a mastectomy to remove breast cancer (a life-saving procedure)? And finally what does this have to do with whether or not the US government should be injected into my personal, private health care and health care cost reimbursement choices, options, and decisions?
health care
My neice had brain trauma three weeks ago, she has been in a coma and had FIVE surgeries with a 20.% chance of survival, and where is this, in ENGLAND, if this were here the whole family would lose everything they have due to medical bills. Many years ago I had a bably at six months while on vacation, baby in an incubator in intensive care for three months, me with a c-section and in for nine days the cost ZERO, the care was great in England. My entire family is over there and love their health care, my friends in Canada love their health care -, only in america can you lose evrything you own due to medical. I am an american citizen nd have paid raxes etc. so don't bother telling me to go back.
advertisement
