(Blog Post) Without a public option, the other parties that comprise America's non-system of health care -- private insurers, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, and medical suppliers -- have little or no incentive to supply high-quality care at a lower cost than they do now. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
Insightful defense of the public option for health care reform. Good kicker -- a strong recommendation for Obama. Refreshing to read.
As a practical matter, the choice people make between private plans and a public one is likely to function as a check on both. Such competition will encourage private plans ... More »
As usual, Secretary Reich makes a very eloquent case; well-organized, concise, and insightful--good use of parallelisms and refuting arguments ("Critics say...")and such.
Critics say the public option is really a Trojan horse for a government takeover of all of health insurance. But nothing could be further from the truth. It’s an ... More »
I like and respect Robert Reich's opinions, but this article makes one argument repeatedly that is subject to question. He insists that the public plan option will put pressure on the other plans to clean up their acts and improve their efficiencies. He also notes that the public "Medicare's administrative costs per enrollee are a small fraction of typical private insurance costs", and this after many decades of its existence. Where, then, is the pressure on the private insurances to match the Medicare efficiency? This is the weakest part of the argument he makes for the public plan option. He ignores entirely the question of whether insurance, public or private, is an effective method of delivering health care services to ... More »
The insurance model is actually at odds with the general delivery of health care. The theory of insurance posits relatively rare payable events among a large population. When only catastrophic care is covered, this theory fits and the insurance model works. When all of health care is covered, however, the payable events are not only not rare, they are experienced by EVERY member of the population, so the theory no longer fits and the model fails. The insurance industry response is to ... More »
Overall, a very good summary of the advantages of having a public option for financing health care. Saying that "It's the only way we have a prayer of taming health-care costs" ignores the very real savings that would come from having a Patient-Centered Medical Home.
It would be nice if he would have included health care reform, and not just changing the financing, in the discussion.
Well stated. He omits the flip side that would address why the critics of private health insurance are right.
This is a subjective but properly thought-out and rather convincing opinion article. i think it is an important contribution to the health care debate.
I share the view that it should not be profit but care which shapes the health care system, so a public option is important.
Not exactly quality journalism, but an argument. My own bias happens to believe Reich is correct in his argument, though.
Insurance companies need to be removed from health care. Health care in the USA is crippling the non-health care related economy and individual family economies across the nation. Look at your paycheck and see how much, if you are lucky enough to have a plan at work, is paid per week toward health care. Ka-POW! To me, health care is a matter of freedom. I do the job I do because it has a plan that will allow me to get sick even after retirement. If there was a national, ... More »
A good summing up of the political arguments for and against a "public" health care option. However, it doesn't really discuss how a public option would work. This is a political issue now, not a health care issue.
Retrieving Comments
