Arguments Against The Public Option: Yahoo!
posted November 2, 2009 - 12:26amThe title of a recently released Yahoo! article is "After all the fuss, public health plan COVERS FEW". It seems like public option opponents are trying to start something again.
So what are their arguments? We always have to look at what people are saying and decide if what they're saying is reasonable or not to either prove or disprove the notion in the title. The first 2 sentences are: "What's all the fuss about? After all the noise over Democrats' push for a government insurance plan to compete with private carriers, the numbers are finally in: two percent" of Americans. Now here's a serious question. Which of the following scenarios are true (or could all three of the following scenarios be true). Either: the legislation was poorly written, REPUBLICANS ARE RIGHT (i.e. Obama and the Democrats really don't care about insuring everyone, however far-fetched that possibility seems) or the private insurance industry cannot stand the fact that they may well now have competition from a government-subsidized plan (i.e. the public sector) and are now making some noise, trying to launch a smear campaign (this is entirely possible).
Here are the two critical issues: "The underwhelming statistic is raising questions about whether the government plan WILL BE THE IRON-FISTED COMPETITOR THAT DRIVES PRIVATE INSURERS OUT OF BUSINESS (this is insane) or a niche operator that becomes a haven for patients with HEALTH INSURANCE HORROR STORIES". The most common (and most likely only) "health insurance horror story" that we should be hearing about these days should be coming from people who either don't have a job and are looking for work or people who have recently been laid off (therefore losing their health insurance) and are again looking for work (obviously because of the horrendous economy).
According to Drew Altman, president of the supposedly non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation, "The public option is a significant issue, BUT ITS PLACE IN THE DEBATE IS COMPLETELY OUT OF PROPORTION TO ITS ACTUAL IMPORTANCE TO CONSUMERS". Surely, Mr. Altman is joking. "It has sucked all the oxygen out of the room and diverted attention from bread-and-butter consumer issues, such as AFFORDABLE COVERAGE and comprehensive benefits". Is Altman out of his mind? He talks about "affordable coverage"? Well, right now, good quality health insurance is unaffordable for many people and their families because of THE SKY-HIGH PREMIUMS THAT MANY INSURANCE COMPANIES CHARGE BECAUSE OF THE ABSENCE OF COMPETITION FROM ANOTHER SOURCE (i.e. the government). Surely, the Kaiser Family Foundation is not "non-partisan".
According to economist Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund, "The concern was that the public option WOULD DESTABILIZE THE BULK OF PRIVATE INSURANCE, but in fact, what Congress has done is very targeted. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE TAKING AWAY THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY'S CORE BUSINESS". This is true. After the health care reform proposal is passed and signed into law, people will have to buy insurance (which is necessary because we don't know when a catastrophe will occur; as they say 'Prepare for the unexpected'; 'The unexpected is to be expected'), BUT NOT NECESSARILY GOVERNMENT INSURANCE. Again, we've said this many times: PEOPLE WHO ARE EMPLOYED AND ARE HAPPY WITH THE HEALTH INSURANCE PROVIDED BY THEIR EMPLOYER OR UNEMPLOYED WIVES COVERED BY THEIR HUSBAND'S HEALTH CARE CAN KEEP THEIR CURRENT POLICY. Notice "It's not going to take away the insurance industry's core business", which, of course, is one of the private insurance industry's favorite complaints/gripes, whether this is legitimate or not. Obama the politician should be happy that an industry expert is on his side (it's now even more ironic that Donald Tsang is a politician by profession).
Finally, according to Antonio M Perez, chief executive of Eastman Kodak, speaking to the Business Roundtable, "THAT COST IS GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU, one way or another...and it's coming back in the way of TAXES and LIABILITIES". This is yet another Republican-like argument. "We just don't believe that there are miracles out there".
Article: http://hubpages.com/hub/againstthepublicoptionyaho...

Comments
Post new comment