On the whole, I’m very happy with Obama pushing for a public option to be included in any kind of health reform bill. Without a public option, there might as well be no reform. Sure, cutting costs and expanding public health are really great things–things we should do and need to do–, but there is a full-fledged crisis out there in the form of millions upon millions of Americans with no access to health care at all unless they pay out of pocket.
Now that’s not a stable population of uninsured, either. Many more Americans are involved in that raw number because coverage is often lost unexpectedly, and especially in this economy, due to job loss, or employers that offer no health coverage to dependents of full time employees, or to part time employees.
At any rate, offering a public option that will likely be cheaper than what most Americans pay for insurance now is only a first step towards actual, longterm health reform. If the concensus is that the system is fundamentally flawed, then why are we keeping the same system, simply adding a little bit of competition to the insurance provider market?
The health and wellness of a nation is a paramount concern for government. We as humans chose to organize ourselves into communities and communities writ large–nation-states with centralized and local governance–because we hope we can live better lives together than we can apart. I can’t think of a single person that doesn’t want to live a long fulfilling life in good health, and if it’s easier to do all kinds of things collectively than individually, then it should be obvious that collectively caring for the health of an entire nation all at once would be something government can and should do, if for no other reason than because the other way–the go-it-alone-in-the-free-market way clearly isn’t working (Ah! I just allowed pragmatism into my post!)
The half measures that it appears we are taking on health care reform now are similar to the half measures we took to stimulate the economy in February, in that we are avoiding actually solving the problem. My question is, if you can solve it, why don’t you try to take steps to actually solve it? The fact is that we can solve the health care crisis with a single-payer nationalized health system.
It bothers me how reticent congress is these days to take real action, even with the tide of public opinion moving further and further Left. I don’t know what it was like in the Clinton years, really, or what it was like in the LBJ years, in terms of how congress and the executive missed opportunities or didn’t push hard enough to make the changes that the people wanted made. But I do know that the public policy really sucked hard during the Bush era. I thought with a new President and many more Dems on Capitol Hill we would see some good governance. Sadly, things have pretty much stayed the same–watered down bill after watered down bill.
I haven’t figured out how compromise in Washington means compromising between what is right and what is nonsense. I always thought compromise involved two parties with ideas that seem plausible, logical and reasonable; the compromise happened on philosophical grounds. In congress and the executive today, all we have are real problem solvers compromising their solutions with people who have no ideas, but simply want to say no. So we compromise and take half of the good stuff out of solid public policy that could actually solve problems. Just stupid, if you ask me.
To make things worse, because those on the Left know that they are inevitably expected to compromise with naysayers, we end up starting with draft proposals lacking teeth. What’s the point with spending months drawing up implemetable (word?) single-payer health reform if it is expected that you compromise with people who don’t have any interest in the health of everyday Americans because they represent the interests of the rich and well-connected?
It pains me to think that states will be first to enact single-payer health systems sooner than the national government, but that is a possibility looking more and more possible, notably here in PA.
I say the Left needs stay away from toeing the line, realizing that the Right exists simply to destroy good public policy, lest the masses realize that the government can do good things and make a positive difference in the quality of life of its citizens.
So the Right Wing Elite don’t want nationalized health care? Screw ‘em! Single-payer will both solve the problem, and fulfill the ethical duty of a government to protect the health of its constituents. After all, a government is a reflection of its people, and if it fails in its moral obligations, we fail. Plain and simple.
And I believe we are once again missing our chance to succeed, once again, in fulfilling our obligations by passing half measures and calling them a final solution. We’re not getting what we bargained for oh so many years ago when the Republic was established. We can do better.
What you should be reading
Is the AMA for or against real health care reform?
mcjoan, Daily Kos
