My response to the Cato Institute on health care reform
Image by Getty Images via Daylife
From my new Guardian column, just published:
The conservative/libertarian Cato Institute has put forth a list of questions for proponents of the Democratic healthcare reform package. Here they are, along with my answers.
1. What does it say that the American polity has consistently rejected a wholesale government takeover of healthcare for 100 years?
It says the issue is very tough politically. It says Washington is unresponsive to the interests of the American people, who overwhelmingly want healthcare reform. It says insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and other health industry special interests (including the AMA until just last year) are exceptionally powerful with “the American polity” and like the status quo.
Also, to suggest this package is a “wholesale government takeover” is intellectually dishonest. The bill doesn’t expand government-run insurance by a whit. It simply builds upon existing regulations and subsidies while relying purely on private insurers to expand coverage.
2. What does it say that public opinion has been consistently against the Democrats’ healthcare takeover since July 2009?
It says the Democrats‘ communications strategy has been weak. It says they upset their base by ignoring universal healthcare and not fighting for the public option. It says they upset independents by not sticking by a clear set of convictions. It says they wasted far too long trying to fruitlessly court Republican votes.
And I end with a question of my own, for thoughtful conservatives:
What does it say that the most fervent self-proclaimed fiscal conservatives are among the biggest opponents of a bill that will cut – that’s right, cut – the deficit by $118bn dollars over a decade, according to yet another CBO analysis?
I have another question, too: What does it say that Republicans are recycling the same arguments they used against Medicare and Medicaid in the 1960s, when they claimed it was unpopular, a socialist government takeover and would be disastrous for America?
It says the Democrats‘ communications strategy has been weak. It says they upset their base by ignoring universal healthcare and not fighting for the public option. It says they upset independents by not sticking by a clear set of convictions. It says they wasted far too long trying to fruitlessly court Republican votes.
It says that Republicans have done a masterful job of spreading disinformation – if not outright lies (ie death panels) – to take advantage of people’s fears and prejudices. It says the mainstream media isn’t doing a good job of calling nonsense “nonsense”. Just ask the opponents of the bill who demand that government keep its hands off their Medicare.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Let me go off topic for a bit to make a point. We spend $650 billion on national defense. We spend countless billions on “intelligence” and homeland security. Yet we have had our asses kicked four times in a row by third-world and citizen armies! (korea, viet nam, iraq and afganistan) Now we are willing to spend a big chunk of our GDP to protect us against these third-world bullies that want to turn us into dope smoking, homosexual religious fanatics but try to spend a few billion to make the lives of our citizens better? TOO EXPENSIVE! We never ask how much when it comes to destroying a third-world country and then re-building it with a better infrastructure than we can afford for ourselves. I’m puzzled by our priorities. But at least I got that off my chest. Thanks !
What I haven’t got my head around is this: There are 30 million people out there that will supposedly get some form of coverage versus none. So that is one very large constituency that is presumably for reform. There are an additional 10’s of millions of small business owners that stand to gain from better rates over time – so that is another very large constituency out there that is also presumably for reform. Moreover, large businesses that buy all the group plans are getting jacked every year, and even if they do manage to push some of the costs off on their employees, it’s still affecting their bottom-line. So you have small and large business interests in-line with doing a good thing for our society as a whole, and we haven’t even touched on the millions of people out there with pre-existing conditions.
My question is much more simple, who is against reform?