As our contentious national debate on health care reform nears its conclusion where are the big ideas that can unite Americans across the political spectrum? There is growing evidence that including the choice of a government run health insurance plan (a “public option”) would significantly strengthen the legislation and advance key principles held by liberals, moderates and conservatives. Here’s why:
1. The Public Option Increases Free Market Competition and Choice
One of the central principles of conservatism is the power of the free markets and consumer choice. Adding the choice of a public plan to compete with private plans will generate more choice and encourage healthy competition with insurance companies to drive down premiums and offer more value and quality to patients.
2. The Public Option Brings Us Closer to Universal Health Care
A core liberal principle is promoting an inclusive society with universal rights. A public plan will bring our nation much closer to the long-held goal of universal health care. It will make affordable health care available to millions of Americans through a public plan without the pressure to increase private profits for shareholders and raise revenues to cover marketing costs and exorbitant CEO salaries.
3. The Public Option Saves Money
"Blue Dog" Democrats and other moderates are committed to the principle of fiscal responsibility. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the strong public option included in the original House bill (with reimbursements set at Medicare rates plus five percent) would save taxpayers $110 billion by pushing down premiums for health care consumers. A modified version of the public option supported by some “blue dog” Democrats would save $25 billion because it would require the HHS Secretary to negotiate rates with providers independently of Medicare and its larger purchasing pool.
Given these facts about the public option and their consistency with guiding principles across the ideological spectrum, it appears Congressional opposition to a public option must be based on: 1) a commitment to protect insurance company profits and the campaign contributions they engender, or 2) a fierce partisan determination to block strong health care reform to undercut President Obama and gain political advantage going into the 2010 and 2012 elections.
Fortunately, the opposition is losing credibility as the benefits of reform are better understood. Several polls demonstrate that the choice of a public plan is popular and that including it increases overall support for health care reform legislation. For example, a recent New York Times poll found that support for offering “a government administered health insurance plan” to compete with private plans is overwhelmingly favored by 65 to 26 percent, a five point gain in support compared to their poll a month earlier.
Now is the time for reform advocates to push hard on these points as the moment of truth approaches for the public option and the health care reform that America so urgently needs.
Barack Obama received more votes last November (66.8 million) than any Presidential candidate in U.S. history. His victory margin of 8.5 million votes was larger than any candidate since Ronald Reagan in 1984. Unlike Reagan, Obama also led his Party to sweeping victories in both houses of Congress. A major plank of the President’s winning electoral platform was his promise of sweeping health care reform incorporating the principles he is now asking Congress to legislate.
This is the time for Democrats and Republicans of good will to deliver on the reforms that over 66 million Americans voted for in free and fair elections last November.
Do the recent loud and angry protests and YouTube moments at town hall meetings mean that President Obama has lost his electoral mandate for change? Of course not. That’s why partisan Republicans, right wing talk radio hosts, and corporate backed lobby organizations with a financial stake in the status quo are all trying so hard to muddy the waters with outrageous and misleading statements linking the President’s reforms with “death panels”, Nazism and other fantasies and deliberate distortions.
When Congress reconvenes after the August recess it will be time for the elected majority to fulfill their electoral mandate for health care reform. Ideally, Congressional Republicans will join in a good-faith bipartisan effort to improve the legislation and achieve consensus. If Republicans continue trying to gain political advantage by obstructing reform then President Obama and Congressional Democrats would be entirely justified in moving forward without them. In any case partisan Republicans and screaming obstructionists must not be given veto power over urgently needed health care reform. The Democrats already have a strong mandate for reform from a record number of American voters in the 2008 election.
Our elected representatives need to listen to the majority of Americans who voted for health care reform and not give in to the angry minority of citizens who are trying to disrupt a constructive approach to this critical problem.
