TheMillerCircle.org

We consistently hear that a single payer health care system, the only economically viable health plan that has been formulated, will never see the light of day as a legislative priority. Well, now it appears that the backup option of a government-sponsored  heath insurance program, which was initially discussed and planned to compete with private insurance companies, is also in trouble in the Senate and of course,  for all the wrong but known reasons. Now that the government insurance plan survived committee challenges in the House, the target has shifted to the Senate, where the opposition to the government insurance option includes numerous moderate Senate Democrats. The private for-profit health insurance companies have drawn a “line in the sand,” as Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) told a National Journal health care panel at a meeting this past March. The July 15th issue of the Washington Spectator has an article on the current state of the government option as part of a health care reform package in the Senate. Despite the fact that the government-run option has come out of House committees, Ignagni and several other chieftains of high profit health care systems believe they have a good chance of killing that portion of health care reform in the Senate. Currently twenty-two Democratic senators are obstructing the government-run insurance program. Former Vermont Governor and Democratic Party chairman (whose work went a long way in getting Obama elected) is leading a national campaign through his Democracy for America advocacy group (standwithdrdean.com). This group maintains a running count of members of Congress who support or oppose the government plan option. Among the twenty-two are Harry Reid (NV), Max Baucus (MT), Evan Bayh (IN), Mark Begich (AK), Michael Bennet (CO), Robert Byrd (WV), Maria Cantwell (WA), Thomas Carper (DE), Kent Conrad (ND), Byron Dorgan (ND), Dianne Feinstein (CA), Kay Hagan (NC), Herbert Kohl (WI), Mary Landrieu (LA), Blanche Lincoln (AR), Ben Nelson (NE), Bill Nelson (FL), Marky Pryor (AR), Jon Tester (MT), Mark Udall (CO), Mark Warner (VA) and Ron Wyden (OR). Independent Joe Lieberman is also opposed to the bill, but the more heroic independent, socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont supports the legislation. So, forget the Republicans, it’s the Democrats on the fence we have to worry about.

At the end of June, a New York Times poll found 72 percent of Americans favor a government-run health insurance program and fifty percent of self-identified Republicans also supported the bill. Although the government-run program is far more flawed that a single payer plan, at the moment, it’s the only player we have in the game. I personally believe that the fear of the plan costing too much is not something we should worry about–not at first. The first thing we need to do is get everyone covered and then and only then should we begin to whittle away at the cost issue, because if everyone is covered, any rationing of health care, which shouldn’t be required initially, will at least seem fair in its application once all citizens have insurance. Besides, we can rest assured that we are already paying too much per capita for medical care. Since every other Western country has a universal health plan of some type, it stands to reason we can find the means to support one of our own. After all, we are the outlier among all other Western democracies. Once we buy the tree, we can trim it to get it inside the house, so that all can enjoy a bountiful Christmas.

The main obstacle we face in the Senate is the Senate finance committee, where Chairman  Max Baucus, is opposed to the government-run program, and his working Republican partner, Charles Grassley who has said “it will eventually take over the market, is opposed to the plan as well, as he still favors “the free market approach” to health care.” In 2003 Max Baucus was only one of two Democratic Senators whom the Republicans allowed to participate in the conference bill for George Bush’s $400 billion Medicare drug prescription bill, one that was written by the pharmaceutical industry. That bill prevents the government from negotiating lower price drugs through mass purchasing and made it illegal for Americans to buy U.S. manufactured drugs that are cheaper when purchased in other countries, like Canada. Unless Max Baucus is prepared to redeem himself from past behavior and run against the grain of his large campaign contributions from the health care industry, he can effectively kill the government-run program in the Finance Committee and so far, it appears that he intends to do just that. Obama needs to send him a riveting epiphany, or do what presidents have done in the past–make sure he gets campaign help if he comes on board the government-run option plan and his health care industry campaign fund chest goes dry. But there is one more person we have to convince: Washington Post reporter David Broder said on June 11, “The president has told visitors that he would rather have 70 votes in the Senate for a bill that gives him 85 percent of what he wants rather than a 100 percent satisfactory bill that passes 52 to 48.” This logic is hard to follow, especially in view of the public polls which overwhelmingly support the government-run option. I think Obama runs the risk of losing some of his constituency if he allows the government-run health insurance option to drop out of the equation for health care reform. If that happens, we will basically see a continuation of the bankrupt health care system we have had for the past twenty years, with a public perhaps finally aroused enough to give Obama a one-term presidency. The sheer numbers of Democratic  Senators opposed to the government-run plan at this moment, indicate that Obama needs to hope for a 52-48 passing vote, because the Democratic majority of the Senate is not on board for the government-run insurance option. In the end, this bill will pass or fail on the basis of Obama throwing a good deal of his political capital into the fray. He is showing signs of taking potshots at the margins of the issue, but he has yet to try to swallow the whole pill. When he recently said “no one has yet drawn a line in the sand,” he apparently was unwilling to admit where the private insurance companies are currently at in the debate.

RFM