at the least cost to our nation.
Some say this is the first step, but I'm in the camp that says the first step happened 45 years ago when Medicare was passed and now we are being asked to accept a few crumbs instead of discussing a national HC plan for everyone.
Here is what Dr. McCanne of PNHP said in January 2007 when the Health Care for America Plan was rolled out EPI and Jacob Hacker.
page 10
http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/evolution-of-the-healthcare-debate.pdf“Jacob Hacker’s proposal is a very welcome addition at a time that all options should be on the table. It is such a compelling model that it may shove all others off of the table - except single payer - then we can get down to a serious discussion about reform that really works.”What PNHP really wanted was to be a part of the discussions, we heard several times that all sides would be allowed to participate in the discussions, but just like the early 90's, not for profit advocates were silenced and ignored.
Fast forward to the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008 and this is what Dr. McCanne stated after the National Conference on the Un and Underinsured in December 2007...
http://pnhp.org/news/2008/january/where-are-we-on-reform-part-2-hacker"...Jacob Hacker has described very accurately the politics of health care reform. He has suggested an approach that, on surface, would appear to lead to affordable coverage for everyone, while passing the crucial test of political feasibility. His political message is very sound - in fact, so sound that the leading Democratic candidates have adopted his suggestions. He has stressed the importance of coalition building well in advance of the installation of a new government one year from now.
So what coalition activities are we seeing within the progressive community? Many respected, influential leaders state that it is time to set aside the policy debate and proceed with a political strategy that will achieve our reform goals. There is one major problem with this approach: most of the difficult policy issues have yet to be addressed. But several of these coalition leaders have told the policy community quite bluntly that the policy debate is over, and all of the activities now must be about unity. We are commanded to unify behind health care reform that promises that you can keep the insurance you have or have the option to buy into a public program.
That's it. That's the policy behind which we are to unify. For the sake of unity, we are not to talk about the inability of the private insurance industry to provide us with affordable health plans that are comprehensive enough to meet our health care needs. We are not to talk about a public insurance program that must provide a premium that is competitive with private plans insuring the healthy, when the public plan is weighted down with high-cost patients (adverse selection)...
Those who insist on unity behind political means while suppressing clarity about policy ends will not be successful in coalition building, and clearly that is not Jacob Hacker's intent. Those of us who insist on clarity about policy ends will be there to be certain that efforts to compromise on means will be an honest, transparent, and fully informed process."
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
