A silver lining on healthcare reform?
I was fascinated last night to see that Anthony Weiner and Barney Frank were two of the first out of the gate with statements that Scott Brown’s win meant healthcare reform needed to pause. Now, these guys are not conservatives. Weiner is Mr. Single Payer himself, and Barney ain’t no slouch. I thought last night that these two guys were taking Brown’s win as an opportunity to derail the existing POS healthcare bills and maybe re-boot the process.
And now, Ezra Klein has a post up with a suggestion on how the Democrats might move forward:
Democrats could scrap the legislation and start over in the reconciliation process. But not to re-create the whole bill. If you go that route, you admit the whole thing seemed too opaque and complex and compromised. You also admit the limitations of the reconciliation process. So you make it real simple: Medicare buy-in between 50 and 65. Medicaid expands up to 200 percent of poverty with the federal government funding the whole of the expansion. Revenue comes from a surtax on the wealthy.
And that’s it. No cost controls. No delivery-system reforms. Nothing that makes the bill long or complex or unfamiliar. Medicare buy-in had more than 51 votes as recently as a month ago. The Medicaid change is simply a larger version of what’s already passed both chambers. This bill would be shorter than a Danielle Steel novel. It could take effect before the 2012 election.
Do it! Do it! Do it! That is definitely a step in the right direction!
Good on ya, young Ezra. Wish you’d been singing this song all along.
*****
P.S. Over at Corrente, otherwise known as Single Payer Central, they’re having an emergency pledge drive. Corrente is an absolutely invaluable voice in the blogosphere — or rather, multiple voices, seeing as how it’s a group blog and everything. If you can possibly spare it, please throw them a few bucks.
8 Responses to “A silver lining on healthcare reform?”
-
Alison says:
Yes! I’m something of a moderate and I would certainly go for that. And… I’m thinking balance the bill with some tort reform and changing the system so that health insurance companies can sell insurance across state lines. That would please the Republicans.
I’d also like to see the pre-existing condition issue dealt with but that might be asking for too much.
But I agree. Do something that is positive and a step in the right direction. It can be simple.
I’m so glad to read this. I’ve been feeling so ill about the bill, no pun intended.
January 20th, 2010 at 5:01 pm EST -
Adrienne in CA says:
Howard Dean suggested the same thing last night.
Of course, great, that’s what they should have done last year. It’ll be much harder now, though, with a skittish public and the Neolibs hellbent on Entitlement Reform. And don’t forget Pharma and Insurance. They’re still after their cut.
*****A
-
cellocat says:
Good for Weiner and Frank for striking while the iron is hot, and Dean too, for that matter. Act now, while the Dems are demoralized by the loss in MA, and trying to regroup. Keep the pressure on! Just don’t let them “reform” Medicare out of the reach of 99% of the population…
And if this happened, we’d escape having a bill with content designed to prevent single payer ever from happening. We’d be somewhat better off, and we’d have missed the bullet by inches.
-
Unree says:
It’s a great idea, but the President would not support a “tax on the wealthy,” and I don’t think there are enough votes in the current Congress for such a tax to pass. Everyone smells a disaster ahead for the Democrats this fall and politicians won’t want to take risks. Expanding Medicare would be popular, but paying for it wouldn’t.
-
Branjor says:
Expanding Medicare would be popular, but paying for it wouldn’t.
I remember reading somewhere that the gov’t wanted to cut taxes in France a few years ago and the people demonstrated against the tax cut because they got so much for their taxes. Maybe if we actually got something for our money here, paying for it would become more popular than losing it.
-
Sevesteen says:
I haven’t heard of a universal care or expanded government care that I’d support. While I would oppose this, but far less than I oppose the current crap.
Uninsured pre-existing conditions can’t be dealt with short of universal coverage. If I can sign up and get treatment for a pre-existing condition, I’ll go without coverage and pay for my own care until I get an expensive medical condition.
-
lambert strether says:
I’d rather have Medicare buy-in than, say, [a|the[ [strong|robust|triggered] public [health insurance?] [option|plan], because of the branding.
But the real answer is not Medicare buy-in, which is just adverse selection, but lowering the age of eligibility for Medicare progressively, which was Kennedy’s plan.
-
Robert says:
I would have thought that the silver lining of health care reform was emigration to a country that already has universal health care.
