Obama’s Universal Health Care Goals

5 Responses to “Obama’s Universal Health Care Goals”

1. 

   Peter August 6, 2009 at 4:21 am #

   “the President is not as forthright with this sort of language” … “but he intends to take us there anyway”
   By what possible scenario do you see this happening? By enacting a plan that he’s confident will result in a failure that will have to be rescued by single-payer?
   Also, isn’t a simpler explanation that he and Congressional Democrats (especially Senator Baucus) caved in to pressure from the health insurers’ lobby?
   Besides, if “the American people don’t really want to go there“, then how do you explain poll results like these? If you can find other survey results that indicate a predominance of opposing attitudes, I’d be interested to see them. I’m sure it hasn’t escaped your notice that (1) worries about health insurance and access to health care and paying for it are a pervasive cause of stress in American life, and (2) those worries do not exist to nearly the same degree in comparably wealthy countries that have single-payer universal health care systems.

   Reply
2. 

   Alex Chediak August 6, 2009 at 1:09 pm #

   Peter,
   I think most Americans (myself included) believe that we need to lower health care costs in this country. And we need health insurance to be portable and not tied to employment.
   Here are two polls for you:
   1. Quinnipiac says:
   American voters, by a 55 – 35 percent margin, are more worried that Congress will spend too much money and add to the deficit than it will not act to overhaul the health care system, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. By a similar 57 – 37 percent margin, voters say health care reform should be dropped if it adds “significantly” to the deficit.
   By a 72 – 21 percent margin, voters do not believe that President Barack Obama will keep his promise to overhaul the health care system without adding to the deficit, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University national poll finds.
   American voters disapprove 52 – 39 percent of the way President Obama is handling health care, down from 46 – 42 percent approval July 1, with 60 – 34 percent disapproval from independent voters. Voters say 59 – 36 percent that Congress should not pass health care reform if only Democratic members support it.
   http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1357
   2. Cost, not universal coverage, is the top concern, says this Rasmussen poll:
   http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/confidence_in_u_s_health_care_system_has_grown_in_recent_months

   Reply
3. 

   Peter August 8, 2009 at 12:06 am #

   “we need health insurance to be portable and not tied to employment.“:
   Such a change would certainly require more than mere “conservative health-care reform“, wouldn’t it?
   Neither of the links you just posted contains poll results that indicate that “the American people don’t really want to go there” (“there” being “a single-payer, universal health care system“). The Quinnipiac page cites a survey conducted last week showing 62% support for “giving people the option of being covered by a government health insurance plan that would compete with private plans”, vs. 32% opposed. And if cost is “the top concern”, as you say, then that would argue for single-payer, as opposed to the status quo, because no country with universal single-payer health care spends as much on health (as fraction of GDP) as the United States does — and you know that.
   Finally, I still don’t get your comment that Obama “intends to take us there anyway“. Do you mean that he’s going to follow up on his intention (how?), or that his intention is and has been thwarted by political realities (which he basically admits)?

   Reply
4. 

   Alex Chediak August 9, 2009 at 4:05 am #

   Peter,
   In terms of Obama “intending to take us there anyway”: my view is that a public option would compete unfairly with the private insurance options, resulting in an increasing percentage of Americans being forced onto the public option.
   For more liberal dems (like Obama, Pelosi, and Barney Frank), I think the view is that a strong public option will attract many people (the “cost and competition” mantra from Press Secretary Robert Gibbs — a smart phrase, given we’re a center-right nation) as it will “seem” like the cheaper way to go. [Sort of like rent control in Berkeley, CA: Keep the prices "low", but then owners don't maintain their properties, since they can't recover their investments, and others (due to insufficient incentive to warrant the cost and the risk) opt not to create more rentals, leading to shortages.]
   That said, I think the Dems are going to save face this Fall by settling for a major compromise: A small tweak on the current system that Obama can claim as a victory. Hopefully with no public option.

   Reply
5. 

   Peter August 13, 2009 at 1:29 am #

   Alex, you write:

   In terms of Obama “intending to take us there anyway”: my view is that a public option would compete unfairly with the private insurance options, resulting in an increasing percentage of Americans being forced onto the public option.

   As happened with Medicare?

   Australia and some European countries have had both private and public health insurance coexisting for decades — and you know that, so why hide your knowledge about them? What I find most mystifying about your posts about health care reform is that I know that you’ve arrived at your views from what you’ve learned about the experiences of different systems in other countries, yet you never mention any other countries, as if you’re too embarrassed to show off by sounding cosmopolitan. If the real reason you oppose a public option is that it’s the way they do it in France, or wherever, and it’s turned out badly there (according to whatever measure), then if you just gave that explanation, it would be much easier to understand than an analogy to rent control in Berkeley.

   Reply

Leave a Reply: