Health co-ops emerge as weak substitute (for Public Option) - USA Today

[JohnWxy]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/08/todays-debate-our-view-on-health-care-health-coops-emerge-as-weak-substitute.html

~~
The primary attraction of health co-ops seems to be that they're more politically palatable than the public option, not that they're a better idea. In fact, there are plenty of reasons for skepticism.

~~
~~

There's nothing wrong with co-ops, per se. Their appeal is that they'd be a sort of kinder and gentler version of private insurance.

But press some co-op enthusiasts for details, and there's a lack of clarity about how they'd get started, how much the start-up would cost, how long it would take, how they'd grow big enough to compete with private insurers, how they'd significantly differ from the original state Blue Cross/Blue Shield organizations and, most importantly, how they could save serious money.

History is not encouraging. Hundreds of health co-ops were formed after the Depression to provide medical care in rural areas, and nearly all of them failed. Even the one considered most successful — Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound in Washington state — took more than 60 years to reach the roughly 600,000 members it has today. (Conrad says a co-op needs at least 500,000 members to have market clout; private WellPoint insures more than 30 million.) Nor does Group Health have a stellar record of holding down costs; since 2000, its annual premium increases for individuals have averaged 12.3%, less than many private insurers but still about four times the rate of inflation.

(more)

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. I've never seen a "co-op" anything that offered any real alternative

to full retail. It might be the idea to start with, but it always seems to end up about the same.

[JohnWxy]

2. It's a false option, really. The lobbyists always use this technique - act like you are FOR

what everybody wants and needs (and this country needs - so as not to go broke with current system) but just offer a phony alternative that protects the profits of those who are paying you to subvert the initiative.

It's kind of a more sophisticated version of the guy on the street who opens his coat with a bunch of shiney watches inside it, which the sucker is supposed to think are expensive watches (Rolexs) but of course, they are fakes.


It's based on the old principle of "Never give a sucker an even break."