An interesting commentary is linked below that adds to my main reason for believing that a Single Payer Plan cannot pass Congress. The use of the corruption concept is simply "follow the money".
My reason is that Medicare Advantage plans are designed in a similar fashion to Heritage Foundation/Romney/Obamacare. They use the Private Sector Health Insurance Companies and I have to admit, with RSL now on Medicare, we preferred the Advantage Plan rather than the traditional Medicare with a Supplemental and Part D policy. Some 20% of the retirees use Advantage Plans as they serve a consumer desire.
Even if you wanted a single payer plan, you have to manage a transition for all the employees of the health insurance industry so they don't all hit the unemployment line at the same time. On the flip side, you have to staff up the Single Payer Plan so it can manage itself and you cannot do that all at once. So, if you cannot design a way to manage a switch to a Single Payer Plan that maintains employment and consumer service issues, you cannot switch to a Single Payer Plan.
So for that reason, I have given up on desiring a Single Payer Plan and believe Heritage Foundation/Romney/Obamacare is the best way to achieve health insurance for all and control of the incessant increases in health care costs that now equal 20% of GDP.
What Ezra Klein discusses in the linked article is that Congress gets a ton of campaign contributions from the health care economy. There is no way Congress will give up these campaign contributions. As usual, follow the money. And, the article has the great following line, something Neo-Cons should remember when they advocate boots on the ground in Syria or anywhere else.
"Still, Reinhardt's argument is a reminder that the simple fact that a policy worked in another country does not mean it will work in this country."
Link to Article
No comments:
Post a Comment