Where McCain's Change Is Bigger Than Obama's

As Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama both plan to engage each other on the economy this week, this presents an opportunity for reporters and voters to focus on one of the biggest contrasts between them: health care. As Paul Krugman observes, "[health insurnace] premiums surged again after 2000, imposing huge new burdens on business. It's a good bet that this played an important role in weak job creation." Fixing our patchwork health insurance system would go a long way to getting our economy back on track.

In most areas of the campaign, Obama offers a change from the policies of the past eight years, and McCain offers a continuation.

But on health care, both offer change. In fact, McCain will change health care for more people than Obama.

All those people potentially affected will have determine if they want the kind of change McCain is offering.

How would McCain's plan change health care for more people? Because he wants to strip the underpinning of how the vast majority of people get their health insurance, through their employers. (Just under 60% of Americans get insurance from employers, down from when President Bush entered office as fewer businesses offered coverage and the number of uninsured Americans rose.)

Presently, you don't pay income taxes on the health benefits you get from your employer. McCain would end that policy, which would not only impose a new tax mainly on middle-class families, but also end a strong incentive for employers to offer health benefits at all, and move us all towards a "consumer-driven" health market.

Putting aside the merits of the plan for the moment, it is politically relevant that McCain's strategy directly impacts the vast majority of people who have health insurance -- many of whom are content with what they have, even though the number of uninsured and underinsured Americans is rising.

In contrast, Obama's plan would create a public insurance option and set new standards for private insurance options so they will be, in his words, "at least as generous as the new public plan and meet the same standards for quality and efficiency." But anyone happy with their health insurance could simply keep it and would find their plan untouched.

Obama's change is more targeted, aiming to help the uninsured and underinsured without unnerving the happily insured.

McCain's change is total, a frontal attack on the entire system as it stands, trying to convince all Americans that they will be happier if most everyone is moved into a new market where you buy insurance out of pocket.

Because Obama's plan involves an active role for our government -- both in creating a public insurance option and serving as a "watchdog" on private plans -- most Beltway pundits would argue that Obama is taking the bigger political risk.

But nearly two-thirds of Americans believe "the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans."

There's hasn't been much polling about the specifics of McCain's plan. But as a general rule, the notion of losing something you currently like is always a troubling prospect.

It will take a particularly powerful argument from McCain to overcome that political hurdle, and convince those voters that his brand of health care change is the right change for them.

Originally posted at the Campaign for America's Future blog

Follow Bill Scher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billscher

Comments

[research]

JUST STOP IT!

STOP trying to point out where McSame has better policy:

McSame is lying!

He will continue the fascist BushCo PNAC agenda.

[Wulfstan]

Frankly I do not want health insurance, I want health care. You know from doctors and nurses, not insurance clerks, who are delighted to deny the coverage you thought you had bought.

Medicare for all is far too simple of course. And the insurance industry buys off our representatives.

[BARRISTER]

Full National Health Insurance like Canada and the U.K is what Americans want and need!!!!

[wild1a]

Privatized insurance under the Republican administrations has deliberately made health insurance not only unaffordable but unattainable for millions of people. Health insurers no longer have insurance as. their primary business. They attempt to avoid paying legitimate claims; they refuse to insure those with "pre-existing conditions"; they have become investment houses with the primary motive of making huge profits using insurance premiums for investment purposes. In the name of common decency and justice insurance coverage should be provided to all at affordable rates. The power that profit making privatized health care has over the executive and legislative branches of our government is frightening. They can and have made decisions as to whether you live or die. For those afflicted with health problems the power of privatized insurance is terrorizing.

[zippywpinhead]

"this presents an opportunity for reporters and voters to focus on one of the biggest contrasts between them"

reporters focusing on actual policy differences? That's laughable- the MSM wouldn't touch a complicated issue like this if you covered it in flag pins...

[GuyRC]

especially when there is a really exciting new swftboat attack every day that needs 24 hours of discussion

[luvangelHussein330]

if people are already having a hard time with health care...how on earth are they going to find decent care on thier own and pay for it when premiums keep rising?

[starboymikey]

However, McBush's solution is to REMOVE the tax break for everyone!!! That's just LOVELY!!
__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­______

How else would he finance million dollar tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population?

[chucktrotter]

Name One...One basic right or necessity that , once unregulated, has had a positive outcome for the middle class and the poor. Inherent in any capitalist endeavor is greed.

[Incredulous]

In typical Republican world, where up is down and black is white, where left is right and right is wrong, now the health system can be reformed by RAISING TAXES! If repealing the Bush tax cuts is "raising taxes", then McCain's health plan is also about "raising taxes". Affordable health care should NOT be a luxury that only the rich can afford. For-profit health care is immoral! In the richest country in the world, every citizen should have access to affordable health care, without having to line the pockets of the insurance companies. It's a national disgrace!

[Stoyver]

All no-value-added players should be culled out of our health care system. Making obscene profit off of illness is beyond immoral, it is monsterous!

[bgregs]

I LOVE the reasoning behind McBush's plan! He claims that he's angered about the fact that those who get insurance through their employer get a tax break, whereas those who purchase it themselves are paying for it using after tax dollars. That's a reasonable complaint, and I can see the concern that he has with it.

The solution to this should be obvious, EVERYONE gets the tax break. However, McBush's solution is to REMOVE the tax break for everyone!!! That's just LOVELY!!

[MourningDude]

The point is that some people are getting gold plated, triple diamond, ultra class benefits, or however you want to describe it, while others are getting minimal coverage, or none at all.

What McCain wants to do is offer people a tax credit for a reasonable amount, and then tax the benefits. So, if you have average coverage, it's a wash. If you have minimal coverage, you have extra money in your pocket that you can use to purchase supplemental coverage or pay your higher deductibles or whatever. And if you have lavish health insurance benefits, you will have to pay the government some money to help offset the tax credits for others.

It's a moderating plan. One that will use market forces to discourage lavish health insurance plans that create an unequal situation, while helping those without any coverage.

[AMERIKA]

That sounds exactly like the kind of double speak plan that any repuglican will endorse. What we need is universal health care. Everyone on the same standard. Then, if you want to purchase the extra coverage you would like to have to "fill in the gaps" in your rationed health care plan, you would be able to on the open market where gold plated plans can cherry pick their subscribers. As a health care provider, I can tell you that NONE of us want to end up working for the government, but we all see the need for universal coverage. At the same time, we are not interested in being told what we can and cannot do to help our patients. Plans that are too restrictive will cause providers to opt out of the plan and go to cash only models. So long story short, be careful what you wish for.

[bgregs]

No, what he wants to do is REMOVE the pre-tax health insurance premiums that employees pay, and then offer a $5,000 deduction. I pay around TWICE that in premiums, which is a SIGNIFICANT tax reduction, as opposed to the mere 5 grand that he's offering!