Health Care Limbo

So this summer the dance craze is the "Health Care Limbo" - let's see how low we can set the bar for health reform. Obama has been on the record as supportive of a public option for all, rather than the current "senior-centric" system. Given the upcoming bump in boomers drawing on public programs, this is the right time to make big changes. But as the summer has dragged on there has been a lot of debate about the various possible means to accomplish the basic goals of health reform.

For the record:

The Administration believes that comprehensive health reform should:

Reduce long-term growth of health care costs for businesses and government
Protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health care costs
Guarantee choice of doctors and health plans
Invest in prevention and wellness
Improve patient safety and quality of care
Assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans
Maintain coverage when you change or lose your job
End barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions

---

I happen to agree with Obama on these points, and I can see how there are many potential paths to achieving these goals.

What is perplexing is that the GOP has any traction fighting against these basic principles. The issue has been approached blindly and the media has been a big part of exacerbating the problem. Most businesses would gladly give up the expense and chore of dealing with health care, and the simplest and most effective way to do this would be a single payer system. The evidence in the world at large is rather overwhelming.

Single payer has achieved the goals outlined by the President. Supplemented by additional or optional private coverage, it is the best of both worlds for all of us.

Absent a "public option" it becomes much more difficult to achieve these goals. Private companies need an incentive to improve their products, and the public plan would provide a backstop for the millions of unemployed and working people who are without coverage. Private insurance companies have perverse incentives that lead to the denial of needed care, bankruptcy for the sick, and insecurity for all.

Until the final bill comes to a vote, I will refrain from a specific critique, but it seems to me that the government must not abandon a hand in achieving the goals set out above. The private market has proven to be more expensive, and less healthy.

Feeling the Stimulus

Politico has put together a panel to look at the possible impacts of the stimulus bill just passed. Everybody agrees that throwing money at the credit markets problem is a good idea, but they can't agree on who should get the most tossed their way. The spending will certainly provide some stimulus, but it is yet to be seen if it is enough to get the machine rolling again. We really needed this bill in August 2008 if we wanted any chance of avoiding the worst part of this recession.

I do wonder how one might notice the effects locally of this federal largesse. Perhaps there will be fewer potholes, and long-needed bridges will get built? One can dream, right? Hopefully the largest impact will be on confidence and job growth, where the economy has been treading water for almost a decade now.

For what it's worth, I hope the bill is a smashing success, because I really want to see what Obama can get done for healthcare and sustainable energy. If he can get us on course for a rapid move to an electric/solar economy, and make health coverage universal, we will all be better off. Here's to change.