That single-payer makes the most sense, from both a dollars and cents and reform of the presently completely dysfunctional system we have perspectives, is irrelevant politically. Single-payer is the ideal. We’re not operating in an ideal environment. This is the real world, and there are very powerful, very well heeled, very vested interests in the present scheme opposing genuine change. The “public option” — the opportunity to buy into a Medicare type federal plan — is most likely the best we’ll get.
But you don’t go into a negotiation with a party whose oft-stated and well known interests are in direct conflict with the best you may hope for by up-front offering to settle for the best you might hope for. That’s not a negotiation tactic, that’s a guarantee you’ll have your tail-end served up as lunch. No! You begin with loud screams that the only change you’ll accept is single-payer, then give half-a-loaf by keeping the present for-profit, private health insurance plans in a mix that also includes a public option.
The reason the private insurance industry is terrified of a “public option” is because it should be. Overwhelmingly everyday Americans and small and large businesses will, before long, examine their options and will opt for the “public option.”
_
_
Conservatives and Republicans have raised a hue and cry — every bit of it shamelessly misleading — against government’s involvement.
During this morning’s Morning Business in the Senate I heard Arizona’s Jon Kyle use the current financial straits that Medicare is in as an argument against the “public option.” He’s right, that Medicare’s financial condition is perilous, to say the least. That it is, however, is not traceable to the basic premises underlying the program. Medicare, like Social Security, is in serious trouble because repeated administrations have repeatedly seen both programs as cash cows they could rob, to make the federal financial statements appear better than they were. The deductions from their paychecks for Medicare and Social Security that Americans were weekly sending to Washington were dumped into the General Fund. If the executive branch, with willing support from the legislative, had kept its grubby paws out of the cookie jar, both programs would be on a sound footing today. Kyle’s argument is intentionally and knowingly bogus BS.
Mitch McConnell (KY-R) brought up a few examples of folks from countries that had a single-payer system who died of brain cancers, unable to secure timely testing. “In government programs like that, many come over here for treatment because in their system they have to wait for care.”
Okay Mitch, I can sing that song. More than a decade ago, I had a very young family member who was battling cancer. (Because I have not secured the permission of the parents, I am not at liberty to disclose the identity of that family member.) The doctors recommended a particular therapy. Months and months passed, with the insurance company denying every appeal. And at the tender age of 23, the patient succumbed. (I think it’s relevant to note the deceased was a straight ‘A’ student through public school, a 4.0 GPA college undergrad and MBA student, and a student who earned that MBA; posthumously awarded to the parents by the governor of the state at the memorial service.)
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
