|
Here's some analysis: This is key and quite ingenious I think. It allows for some market competition to try to lower prices as insurance companies compete against each other and the federal government. If the government program proves to be the best option (which if we have a Democratic government, it surely will be) then it will be a no-brainer to choose the federal plan and over time we should have a gradual transition to a single-payer system. The framing on this is excellent. We can talk about competition and it will be hard for the republicans to beat this back. If the private market wins, so be it. If it doesn't, then don't Americans deserve the best plan available, even if it happens to be the federal plan? http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/5/15200/45347Let me talk just briefly about my plan for universal health care, and then I'm sure we'll get into more detail as we go through this conversation. Basically what we do is cover all Americans. In my plan there's shared responsibilities. The employers are required to either cover their employees or to pay into a fund that will help pay for coverage for their employees. The government plays an important role. The government will set up health care markets all across America, and in each of those markets if you're the consumer, you can go in and choose what your health care plan would be. Some of the choices are private insurers, and then one choice is a government plan, basically a Medicare Plus plan. And the idea is to determine whether Americans actually want a private insurer or whether they'd rather have government run Medicare Plus kind of single-payer plan. And we'll find out over time which way people go.
...
It is true that single-payer health care systems in the world dramatically reduce costs and significantly reduce administrative costs, particularly compared to private insurers. It's also true that a lot of people who are listening to this forum like the health insurance they have now and would like to keep it.
And my judgment is, number one, to get it done so that we don't spend another decade arguing about whether we keep the system we have now or actually have universal health care. I think this system, my proposal, a truly universal plan, a bold plan, but doesn't go directly to single-payer, can be accomplished. I think it can be accomplished politically. I think we can get support from across the political spectrum and will accomplish a lot of what we want to do.
Second, it does give people choice. And I think Americans have become accustomed to having choice, and I think they want to be able to choose what their health care plan is. Now, it may be that that gravitates towards a single-payer plan because they will have the Medicare plus the choices. And if that's the case, then the whole system can go in that direction. But you'll decide that. Consumers will decide that. So I think actually this plan makes sense in terms of moving us forward, getting a universal health care plan in place, giving people the choice of the equivalent of a single-payer plan with Medicare Plus, and then we'll see where it goes from there. http://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/healthforum/edwards_transcript.html
|