As a skeptic of Hillary Clinton's potential to deliver health care reform, I was quite impressed with the new plan she laid forward Monday. It's clear, it's doable, and although I believe that a single-payer system would be more ideal in the long run, Hillary makes a strong case about why her plan is the best for American right now. My biggest concern, however, is the name...
The "American Health Choices Plan" was no doubt designed by some political strategist wanting to mend any remaining scars from '93, but for me, the title seems to be a giveaway to the market ideology that health is a commodity to be bought and sold. It's true that Hillary's health plan, like those of all the Democratic candidates, offers new options for millions of Americans who have long had none, but is choice what this debate is all about? Since when did health care become a supermarket?
Conservative commentators have already jumped on the opportunity to attack Hillary using arguments about choice. In yesterday's Wall Street Journal, for example, Karl Rove returns to the typical conservative critique against government by insisting that we should instead rely on "patients making informed choices [who] would create market pressures for lower prices and better care." Although research suggests that this market-only option doesn't work for health care, I'm concerned that in our sound-bite culture all this talk about choices will be easily conflated, leading to another failed attempt at national health reform.
Instead of apologizing to conservatives, it's time that progressives start using their own language. Last spring, I wrote my own story about the need for national health reform as part of a student essay contest sponsored by the Kaiser Family Foundation. In the essay, I cite the escalating costs and the poor health quality of the "sick care" system we've created, and I argue the need for a true "health care" system that prevents disease and strengthens communities. It's not a matter of having hundreds of choices; it's about ensuring health and economic security to all Americans.
Over 60 years ago, towards the end of World War II, Franklin Roosevelt famously declared in his State of the Union address all Americans deserve "the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health." Now as we face our own critical juncture, why can't progressive leaders of today have the same courage and commitment to define the debate with bold words for a better future?
Whenever government requires it's citizens to buy anything, the price will balloon because the sellers take advantage of the requirement.
Today, I rejected several Dental Plan offers because the premiums in contrast to the deductables and exclusions were farcical. Imagine if I was ordered by the government to buy dental insurance: the worthless coverage would empty my savings and leave me gumming whatever food I could still buy.
Mr. Nelb, thanks for eloquently articulating what I have been thinking for a long time.