Will the President Set Aside Ego and Party Politics for the Public? Obama Health Care Plan Logo - image "thisainthell blog
The Presidents Health Care Forum will be broadcast on C-Span today beginning at 10 AM. One can watch the proceedings online at C-Span.org/Topics/Health-Care-Lesigslation-Town-Hall. The forum, designed to be a show of bi-partisanship, will showcase the Presidents Health Care Plan, a copy of which has been available at Whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/proposal for the past week is an outline, with pdf downloads available showing “key highlights” of what Obama envisions for the Public. C-Span has both the House and Senate versions, with a comparative analysis by the Kaiser Foundation here at-C-Span.org/Topics/Health-Care-Lesigslation-Town-Hall. All three proposals include hefty increases in taxes – they have kept the CBO busy trying to calculate the scale of the costs of each proposal - in the instance of the President’s plan, there is, apparently, no way to actually project the expenditures.
The clash will come from Party politics, in part, because Conservative Republican’s have been kept out of all meetings, in both houses, to date. It is not so much that Republican’s do not have solutions; it is that their solutions do not include 10,000 pages of entitlements, jargon and impending government bureaucracy. Due to the simple nature of the cost savings measures proposed by Republican lawmakers, Democrats who thrive on government spending, have, to date, refused to listen and have dismissed solid ideas out-of-hand. One of which is to start-from scratch, to work on a true bi-partisan measure – something the President is loath to do. It would, in essence, be a further delay in passing legislation on health care. More likely, it would no longer be the “Presidents” plan, which, either through arrogance or ignorance is preferred.
Would it not be better to take Health Care Reform back to the drawing table, listen to ideas from all sides, and come up with a program that would benefit the public, without breaking the bank? There are options available that would cut costs – and they come from both the public and private sector – yet, no-one can cut through the haze of self-important party politics long enough to get anything done. The later, in this case, may not be a bad idea.
Some stunningly simple examples of how to control costs come from both sides of the aisle, and should be considered and implemented – a pared down approach that would expand coverage, and decrease costs. Hillary Clinton’s plan, as explained during an interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, would expand the coverage currently offered to the members of Congress, as well as those civilian employees and retirees that work for the government to the general public. During the Town Hall Meetings, Representative Nikki Tsongas was asked why she would be exempt from the plan proposed by Congress and be allowed to maintain her current coverage, the same coverage Hillary Clinton would extended to Americans in general (article with Clinton’s interview and plan here )to which the representative replied that she had a wide range of options. Exactly Clinton’s point – in fact if that coverage were made available to the general public as an option it would have the effect of widening the risk pool and driving pricing down further. (So much for super-delegates.)
Republican proposals include simple tort reform (which will limit mal-practice awards, some of which are ridiculously high, which will lower physician’s costs, ultimately passing savings down to the consumer), and allowing carriers to sell policies across state lines (which will increase competition and again, drive down costs to the consumer).
An op-ed in the Orange Country Register written by George Patos, a former deputy undersecretary of Commerce, former general counsel to the Self-Insurance Institute of America and current Executive Director, Healthcare Performance Management Institute suggests the putting technology to use so that companies can better streamline health care costs and take better control over their health care expenses. Mr. Patos’ full article is available here at www.ocregister.com/opinion/health-255811-care-companies
It is not for lack of better ideas, rather unwillingness on the part of the administration and the majority in Congress to accept ideas that are at once simple and will actually work, without increasing the deficit. This schoolyard mentality that has evaded Washington politics for far too long is to benefit a Political Party, not the public. It has not gone unnoticed. Current polling on Congressional job approval has dropped to a stunning 10%, 51% of American’s actually Fear the federal government more than insurance companies and a CBS News Poll reports that 55% of American’s disapprove of the Presidents handling of the Health Care Reform Issue. One would think that a true show of bi-partisanship from both parties on this issue, taking it back to the table with all plans laid out and choosing the most cost-effective, viable pieces from contributions both public and private, would best serve the public. If it took a year or more to get this most important legislation passed and get it right, so that any reform has almost full public support, it would be worth the time and trouble. It would also, possibly save a few jobs in Congress. That said it is doubtful that today’s summit will be nothing more than a show of party politics, pitting us and against them, in that ever mind-numbing “Shining city on the Hill”.
1 comment:
interesting
Post a Comment