More

Ryan J. Davis

Ryan J. Davis

Posted: August 22, 2009 10:35 PM

No Public Option Is Still Much-Needed Reform


There is a lot of anger from the left about what's being seen as Obama capitulating to the Republicans on health insurance reform. During the campaign Obama favored a public option. Now, the public option appears in danger and many liberals don't think "real" reform is possible without it.

In a perfect world, I'm for the most progressive health reform possible. But, our world is far from perfect and politics is the art of the possible. There are 47 million people in America without health insurance and they don't care if it's a public or private option that provides it. They just want access to quality health care.

A few days ago Matthew Yglesias wrote where he stood on health care and I found myself agreeing with him.

-- In terms of the present-day political debate, I think mandate-regulate-subsidize plus a public option would be a major improvement over the status quo.

-- But even though mandate-regulate-subsidize without a public option wouldn't be as good, I still think it would be an improvement over the status quo.

-- I don't think reform advocates should "drop" the public option; I think they should fight for it and try to bring practical pressure to bear on members of the Senate to vote for one.

-- But if in the final standoff we get a choice between mandate-regulate-subsidize and the status quo, I would prefer to take mandate-regulate-subsidize.

In summer 2003, I moved to Burlington, Vermont to join Howard Dean's Presidential Campaign. One of Dean's main draws for me, besides his brave stance on the Iraq War, was his success at providing near-universal health insurance to Vermont's residents. He did this without a public option.

In fact, Ezra Klein recently pointed out that Dean, considered one of the most liberal candidates in the '04 primary, didn't have a public option or co-ops in his national '04 platform.

Dean's plan would have insured millions fewer people than the bills being considered in the House or the bill that we think we'll see out of the Senate.
...
For all that, it was a good and well-meaning plan. But it was a lot worse than what we're considering now. It was a lot worse even than the compromises we're considering now.
I admire the liberals in the House who say they won't vote for a bill that doesn't contain a public option, but I hope in the end they put a reform bill on Obama's desk to sign. As Paul Starr says in the current issue of American Prospect, "if any of them actually do vote against the final bill and prevent it from passing because it fails to offer a public option, they will help to ruin the best chance in years to put health care on a path toward reform."


Read Ryan's Blog For More.

Follow Ryan J. Davis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RyanNewYork

 
 
  • Comments
  • 38
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jmpurser
See My micro-bio
01:32 PM on 08/24/2009
The main difference the "public option" makes is without it the bill is pure corporate welfare. With it the bill is slightly tainted corporate welfare. Without it the bill cannot have any possible positive effect on either cost control or quality improvement. With the option then maybe if something magical happens somewhere down there road things won't be quite as bad as they would have been without it.

The "public option" is what we get INSTEAD OF health care reform. Losing it means our congress won't even pretend to represent our interests.
12:45 PM on 08/24/2009
Part II --

"The message will be unmistakable: caravan with us to Washington and help make a public demonstration of support for Single Payer Health Care that will be heard around the world."

"Imagine..."

"Thousands of cars pulling into the nation's capital for a protest on the White House lawn. The sidewalks are filled with supporters carrying signs in support of the Mad As Hell Doctors who have captured the imagination and the ignited the passion of their fellow citizens. We wave and honk at the camera crews, as do the endless line of cars behind us, as we wend our way toward the White House. On every antenna, on the backside of every car, and flapping like flags from sidewalk supporters, is the symbol of this new movement: the White Ribbon."
12:44 PM on 08/24/2009
So far, this appears to be the most coordinated effort to demonstrate for the single-payer option. Many of us were focused on September 13th as the date to demonstrate in Washington. Maybe we should throw our support behind these physicians' efforts. Please help me spread the word.

If you click on the link their website it provides additional information, a sign-up for the events, and a map that indicates the cities they will stop in enroute to Washington.

http://www.madashelldoctors.com/

"On September 8th, a caravan will cross America to deliver a clear and simple message to our elected officials in Washington."

"On September 8, 2009 a group of dedicated Oregon physicians will take the message of Universal Health Care "on the road" in a wrapped and branded Motor Home headed for Washington D.C. Our cross-country mission: to stop in big cities and whistle stops alike, conducting pre-booked, local and national media appearances for a curious press. Every move we make along the way will be recorded on camera and then edited and uploaded to the internet that same day. This will allow our Mad As Hell Doctors Tour to leverage the edited video segments on social networking web sites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, et al. In this way, our effort becomes an unprecedented hybrid of reality television and political activism that offers people the opportunity to follow us, in real time, as our story unfolds."
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Arrecho
11:15 AM on 08/24/2009
Health Care reform 101:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxdNMqbwjWQ&NR=1
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
worldlyhick
08:26 AM on 08/24/2009
A bill without a public option is pointless, except as a windfall for the insurance companies. Without some profound changes to the health access system, we can expect the situation to become steadily worse. The Health Insurance Industry is not going to suddenly grow a conscience and care about insuring the poor or taking care of people that they can easily abandon when they become unprofitable.

The emergency room is not an acceptable system to handle the problems of the uninsured. In addition to overburdening our emergency care system, the emergency room is not equipped to handle chronic problems until they become dangerously threatening, often too late. Using the emergency room as a substitute for well planned health care is not an answer.

Expanding educational opportunities for potential health care workers and improving our health infrastructure is an answer. That is the kind of investment we have to undertake as a people through our system of government if we value a good health care system.
09:35 PM on 08/23/2009
n o n s e n s e . . . r e d h e r r i n g
07:57 PM on 08/23/2009
How about coming up with an idea to get 470,000 more doctors to treat your so called 47 million poor uninsured and then come up with the money from your same fantastical ideology. I have a feeling that logic is not viable. Wait, maybe we could just start with passive counseling and when we finally discover socialized healthcare is bogus, like all the other socialized systems under the Federal umbrella, then we can institute the policies that were staged, open ended and vague. Those policies could then be redefined and reinterpreted at our convenience, after all we have to be able to satisfy our promissaries, our indebtedness to the Chinese Government who are calling our "Notes" with interest for our principles. Well, it may not be now but the stage is certainly set for putting a price on human life, rationing healthcare for the very young and old. Brilliant plan ...
03:53 PM on 08/24/2009
Your logic has the same consistency as Swiss cheese.

The 47 million are already getting the most expensive medical care there is - in emergency rooms. We don't need more doctors, just need to use them wisely.

The only socialized medical care in the USA is the Veterans Administration, which is consistently rated as the most efficient and capable medical organization. You may not care for socialized medicine, but I'd rather not be ranked 37th in medical use behind all of those socialized countries.

What politician would create a system that rations care and kills granny? That's not the way to get re-elected!!
06:32 PM on 08/23/2009
Who out there has ever been denied access to a doctor, emergency room, care etc. I really would like to know. Evenyone who has ever walked into an emergency room has gotten care. I want to hear from the people who have denied care.
06:30 PM on 08/23/2009
You know what..............has anybody out there, without coverage, ever been denied at a hospital?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
07:49 PM on 08/31/2009
At a hospital? Yes. At an Emergency Room? No. On the other hand, when I've been seen by a regular doctor the costs are minimal. When I've been seen in the Emergency Room, the costs are astronomical!!
jhNY
Mercy.
05:46 PM on 08/23/2009
The millions not insured do not want 'access' to health care, and they don't want another mandated bill to pay in the midst of what is, for the working poor, a depression. They want health care. Not insurance. Period.

But Obama and all the triangulating centrists that together will strategize his presidency down a rat-hole cannot bear to come up with what the uninsured want, or what his base wants, as it would displease important donors to future campaigns-- which sadly, they will lose, having proved to be so feeble and changeable on the health care question, the banking question and the mortgage question.

Want to know how to make a man with a real chance at being a great president look ineffectual and chicken? I can't tell you how myself, but I am certain that Rahm Emanuel can fill in all the details.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PostModernPatriot
11:27 PM on 08/23/2009
Excellent. Fanned & faved.
03:10 PM on 08/23/2009
Mandate-regulate-subsidize? It may as well be called mandate-magicponies-subsidize!

A bill without the public option is not health care/insurance reform. It will be a mandate that will force all Americans to carry insurance and a government subsidy paid to private insurance companies. When Obama mentioned it wasn't important for a public option to be in the final bill and co-ops would be okay the stock price of health insurance companies skyrocketed(I'm guessing co-ops will work about as well in reducing costs and providing better care as an enchanted amulet).

If there is any regulation it will be weak and ineffectual. The meat and potatoes of any law is in the fine print written into the law and the bureacratic directives defining the law. Do you know the names of the legislative aides writing the laws? Do you know the names of the bureaucrats tasked with interpreting the laws? I don't, but I am certain the insurance/pharma/hospital lobbyists do.

In the real world, the only humane and cost-effective solution to the health care crisis is single-payer. The public option is as far as any reasonable person can compromise from single payer without it becoming a straight out subsidy for insurance companies and a fake accomplishment to burnish the record of President Obama. No public option is worse than nothing.
12:37 PM on 08/23/2009
Forget that, dont give in. The Majority of the people want the public option, not having it will surly show our so called democracy is a sham and a sell out.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
WorkingClass
10:29 AM on 08/23/2009
I hope the house liberals hold their ground. If they don't we will have giant new public subsidies for the criminal "health care" business like we already have for the criminal banking business. Public option is already a shameful compromise. Failure of the public option will be a clear call for a general strike.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
10:28 AM on 08/23/2009
You know, I've heard and agree with the statement about "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good".

That's a valid point to raise, when you are dealing with a good option and a perfect option, or nothing. In this case, however, we are dealing with an okay option, a BAD option, and nothing. In that case, it's not the perfect being the enemy of the good, it's the good being the enemy of the bad!!!

A public option was already a compromise when it was first proposed, the compromise between single payer and status quo. Not allowing the public option in will CONTINUE to prevent us from having meaningful health care reform!!
08:51 AM on 08/23/2009
tempt the masses with and then decieve them ... I would not take a bite of that apple