Here's your choice Santa Clarita: the regressive, free-market-solves-all policies of the right & Mr. McKeon or the Obamacare law is ok but needs some fixes from the progressive side represented by Dr. Rogers:
McKeon:
The Republican answer to health care reform usually involves two bedrock principles: 1) individuals should be allowed to purchase policies across state lines. That way Kaiser -rather effecient as HMOs go- in California, could sell policies to Bubba Jo in Arkansas, where Bubbo Jo's policy choices are rather limited and expensive because the insurance pool in Arkansas is rather sickly and expensive and 2) medical mal-practice tort reform- the idea being that physicians are sued too much which makes medical services & insurance more expensive as a result.
Rogers:
It's clear Rogers is no fan of Obamacare either, so that should please some local conservatives who are unhappy with Team McKeon's antics and ethical lapses over the last year and a half. But pay attention to the last line of the statement: "Going foward, we need to have at least one option for patients that insurance companies don't control."
That, my friends, is what we progressives have wanted for a long time: the public option. Basically, I think, Rogers would be in favor of extending a Medicare-like program to folks under the age of 55. Rogers truly wants a government-run health care plan for individuals who need it (the Obama act as it is, is in no way "Government run" as McKeon points out) which has good and bad attributes. It'd probably be expensive on a line item on a budget, but having one agency provide services for sick people would be more effecient than having a bunch of for-profit firms & a stack of regulations providing services for sick people.You see, the government benefits by having huge buying power, unified administration and economies of scale. The Kaisers, Blue Shields, Aetnas and such do not, since they're competing against each other to earn profits for their shareholders.
The SCOTUS ruling by no means that this age-old debate is dead. It's just a new chapter. In this country, we usually let the free market find ways to fix problems first, and it excels at that greatly. Telephones, light bulbs, nice cars, dishwashers, wristwatches, iPads and air conditioners-these are all products aimed at solving problems and no where else on earth are such problems solved with such innovation and drive as in America. The men and women who inventedsolutionsto these problems are rightly and richly rewarded.
But sometimes the market fails to solve problems. In America, the free market is free to develop all sorts of health insurance plans, yet it has failed to provide affordable care for tens of millions of Americans. Both McKeon and Rogers recognize this problem, that the market has failed. But McKeon's solution is to let it even be more free; Rogers' solution is to set up an alternate government program that's not susceptible to the same downward spiral pressure that results in higher medical costs and poorer outcomes compared to virtually every other developed nation.
So let me conclude by agreeing with Petz for once: this November, your choice shouldn't be just about CEMEX. And it's not as simple as more government or less government either. Your choice should really be about strengthening a system (the free market) to do what it does best but also using a tool (government) to mitigate failures of the market for the betterment of us all.You don't have to be a wishy-washy, bleeding-heart liberal to desire a more healthy America where kids and adults get the care they need regardless of their economic ability.
Beyond all the noise on the TV, that's what this really boils down to, and it's neat to see Rogers & McKeon touch on these grand themes in their reaction statements today.
Buck-Rogers on Supreme Court Ruling
McKeon:
While I respect the Courts ruling, it doesnt change what we know to be true: Obamacare is a bad law that is wrong for America. Today the Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare is constitutional, not that it is a good or wise law. Obamacare is still a dangerous collaboration of bad legislating, smoke and mirrors calculations and dangerous policy.Under President Obama's signature legislation, health care costs continue to skyrocket, and up to 20 million Americans could lose their employer-based coverage.Born from intensely partisan, back door deals and closed room meetings, Obamacare is a boondoggle of historic proportions. While no one can argue that our healthcare system doesnt need reform, the partisan and closed door way in which this bad law was forced on the American people made it wrong from the beginning. Even though ruled constitutional, Obamacare is a law that will add trillions to our debt, increase healthcare costs, hike taxes and kill jobs.I will continue to fight to repeal the entire law and replace it with commonsense solutions that address the critical issue of American healthcare.
The Republican answer to health care reform usually involves two bedrock principles: 1) individuals should be allowed to purchase policies across state lines. That way Kaiser -rather effecient as HMOs go- in California, could sell policies to Bubba Jo in Arkansas, where Bubbo Jo's policy choices are rather limited and expensive because the insurance pool in Arkansas is rather sickly and expensive and 2) medical mal-practice tort reform- the idea being that physicians are sued too much which makes medical services & insurance more expensive as a result.
Rogers:
Todays Supreme Court decision is bittersweet. The Supreme Court upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in its entirety, including the controversial individual mandate to purchase health insurance.
The good news is that people who have already benefited from the law will continue to benefit. But the bad news is that the law still needs to be fixed. No law is perfect, but this one benefits the big health insurance companies like no other. The law prevents insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, but it doesnt put a cap on premiums. Although you cant be denied coverage, you can still be priced out of the market, essentially accomplishing the same thing. Going forward, we need to have at least one option for patients that insurance companies dont control.
It's clear Rogers is no fan of Obamacare either, so that should please some local conservatives who are unhappy with Team McKeon's antics and ethical lapses over the last year and a half. But pay attention to the last line of the statement: "Going foward, we need to have at least one option for patients that insurance companies don't control."
That, my friends, is what we progressives have wanted for a long time: the public option. Basically, I think, Rogers would be in favor of extending a Medicare-like program to folks under the age of 55. Rogers truly wants a government-run health care plan for individuals who need it (the Obama act as it is, is in no way "Government run" as McKeon points out) which has good and bad attributes. It'd probably be expensive on a line item on a budget, but having one agency provide services for sick people would be more effecient than having a bunch of for-profit firms & a stack of regulations providing services for sick people.You see, the government benefits by having huge buying power, unified administration and economies of scale. The Kaisers, Blue Shields, Aetnas and such do not, since they're competing against each other to earn profits for their shareholders.
The SCOTUS ruling by no means that this age-old debate is dead. It's just a new chapter. In this country, we usually let the free market find ways to fix problems first, and it excels at that greatly. Telephones, light bulbs, nice cars, dishwashers, wristwatches, iPads and air conditioners-these are all products aimed at solving problems and no where else on earth are such problems solved with such innovation and drive as in America. The men and women who inventedsolutionsto these problems are rightly and richly rewarded.
But sometimes the market fails to solve problems. In America, the free market is free to develop all sorts of health insurance plans, yet it has failed to provide affordable care for tens of millions of Americans. Both McKeon and Rogers recognize this problem, that the market has failed. But McKeon's solution is to let it even be more free; Rogers' solution is to set up an alternate government program that's not susceptible to the same downward spiral pressure that results in higher medical costs and poorer outcomes compared to virtually every other developed nation.
So let me conclude by agreeing with Petz for once: this November, your choice shouldn't be just about CEMEX. And it's not as simple as more government or less government either. Your choice should really be about strengthening a system (the free market) to do what it does best but also using a tool (government) to mitigate failures of the market for the betterment of us all.You don't have to be a wishy-washy, bleeding-heart liberal to desire a more healthy America where kids and adults get the care they need regardless of their economic ability.
Beyond all the noise on the TV, that's what this really boils down to, and it's neat to see Rogers & McKeon touch on these grand themes in their reaction statements today.