How to explain the public option for healthcare reform. Really.

Policy? Yes, Advocacy? Not so sure (0.00 / 0)

hi everyone!
hi los anjalis ;)
No post in a while. Happy to be back!

I think this is a great, simplified explanation of the public option from a policy standpoint,

but, I think it does harm to the push toward insurance reform.

Here's why: If am insured and get it through my employer (like vast majority of Americans) and am leery of govt intervention or bigger spending on health care, I would think that the proposals he describes can be achieved through greater regulation of insurance cos. He explains well that the public option will not be compulsory, which appeases the "I Fear Govt" crowd. But it goes beyond that - if your employer offers insurance already, they arent allowed to enter the exchange and have access to the public option.

I think that's how Im currently understanding it.

So the real reforms (a superior, cheaper, primary care-focused public insurance option) are out of reach for most insured folks, while the benefits they would see can be done through regulation. And BINGO there goes my impetus to speak out for and support health insurance reform.

wait, i think I just confused myself. someone clear it up for me.

All I know is, unless the public option is open and available to EVERYONE including people who are insured through their employer, then the advocacy draw toward it isnt there.

Instead, take the other tack: The insurance cos will NEVER be responsible to the public. They are responsible only to their shareholders and to profit-making, and maybe they should keep on doing that. But at least give EVERYONE a choice to get out of that racket if they want.

Oops didnt meant to go on like this. Im just trying on some new Frames. I realize I still have some work to do.

Let me know what you think
~casey

---

by: daprovocateur @ Fri Aug 21, 2009 at 14:14:58 PM CDT