Majority Of Populist Caucus Supports Public Plan
[Program Note: I'm reproducing a press release today, instead of writing a column, so I hope you'll forgive my laziness. But while it is tempting to take the salient facts and quotes from the press release and make it appear as if I dug this story out on my own, I think it's more honest just to reprint the press release itself. Some might call it mere stenography, but I'd prefer my readers to draw their own conclusions. Having said all that, below is the press release from Populist Caucus Chair Bruce Braley's office, followed by the text of the letter they signed their names to (complete with a list of those who signed it).]
Populist Caucus Urges House Leadership to Include Public Option in Healthcare Reform Bill
Today 17 members of the House Populist Caucus released a letter sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelsoi [sic] and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer urging the inclusion of a public health insurance option in the healthcare reform bill.
"The public option is an effective compromise and stands as a middle road to health care reform, allowing citizens who enjoy their current coverage to keep private insurance, while providing a quality, lower cost alternative to interested citizens," the letter reads.
"We urgently need to fix our broken healthcare system," said Populist Caucus Chair Bruce Braley. "We need to pass real, meaningful reform that reduces the ever-growing burden of healthcare costs on middle class families. Including a public health insurance in the final healthcare reform plan will force insurance companies to compete and drive costs down."
The Populist Caucus is the only caucus in Congress devoted solely to addressing middle class economic issues. Made up of 28 members from across the US, the Populist Caucus works to bring members of Congress together around key middle class issues.
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, US Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
The Honorable Steny Hoyer
Majority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives
H-107, US Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer:
Thank you for your leadership as we work towards comprehensive healthcare reform. As members of the Populist Caucus, we write in support of a strong public option as a vital part of any healthcare reform bill that is passed by the House. This option should compete on a level playing field with private insurance, maintain a minimum standard of benefits, provide quality care, reimburse providers equitably and adequately, and address current geographic disparities.
Over the past decade, increasing healthcare costs have outpaced inflation, raising costs and lowering the quality of life for many American families who struggle to afford their medical care. The House’s work to date on healthcare reform is commendable and shows promise at fixing a system which will only grow more expensive and less responsive to the needs of patients if unchecked. To ensure a check on the current system, and to have maximum effect, any healthcare reform considered by the House should contain a public option.
The public option is an effective compromise and stands as a middle road to health care reform, allowing citizens who enjoy their current coverage to keep private insurance, while providing a quality, lower cost alternative to interested citizens.
Once more we ask that you take the necessary steps to include a strong public option in any healthcare legislation brought before the House. Thank you again for your continued leadership and please feel free to contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Bruce Braley, Chairman, Populist Caucus
Peter DeFazio, Vice-Chair, Populist Caucus
Keith Ellison, Vice Chair, Populist Caucus
Betty Sutton, Vice Chair, Populist Caucus
Bob Filner
Leonard Boswell
Jan Schakowsky
Michael Michaud
Lloyd Doggett
Phil Hare
Hank Johnson
Steve Kagen
David Loebsack
Carol Shea-Porter
Peter Welch
John Yarmuth
Eric Massa
-- Chris Weigant
"The public option is an effective compromise and stands as a middle road to health care reform, allowing citizens who enjoy their current coverage to keep private insurance, while providing a quality, lower cost alternative to interested citizens,"
The problem with this assesment is it's misleading.
What if the public option does drive some insurance companies to bankruptcy, which is certainly possible and even likely..
The people who still choose to have that particular insurance company won't be able to keep their private insurance, as the letter claims.
Michale.....
What if the public option does drive some insurance companies to bankruptcy, which is certainly possible and even likely...
that happens already with only private options available. when there's competition, some companies go out of business. they do now, with no public plan. an available public option doesn't necessarily mean there will be any more attrition than before, just more choices in the market. if a company is good, it won't fail. if it's NOT good then it SHOULD fail, and the people who had it can get something better, private or public. That's how the market ought to work.
as CW first pointed out in FTP-76, it's the height of doublethink to say that a Tedicare choice will be terrible AND will put private insurance out of business. either it will be worse and people won't choose it, or it will be better, in which case it will be BETTER. either way, the patient wins.
the patient wins.
isn't that what we want?
Populist Caucus ... what a fantastic idea!
Seriously, I had never heard of this and it is a great way to specifically reach out to the middle class.
And also seriously, yes to more competition!
This is a statement from WellPoint's website: "One in nine Americans receives coverage for their medical care through WellPoint's affiliated health plans."
akadjian -
You must've missed my interview with Braley, back in March.
Check it out!
:-)
nypoet22 -
I'm impressed - it's not often I have someone else do a better job looking up my own citations than I could. I have nothing more to add, you summed it up beautifully. Thanks!
-CW
nypoet22
that happens already with only private options available. when there's competition, some companies go out of business. they do now, with no public plan. an available public option doesn't necessarily mean there will be any more attrition than before, just more choices in the market.
True.. Yet that doesn't address the fact that the claim by this populist group is still misleading.
If the public option drives some insurance companies to bankruptcy, then those who have that insurance will NOT be able to keep their same insurance. Ergo, the statement made by the populist group is false.
The fact that it could happen anyways without DunselCare is irrelevant to the validity (or lack thereof) of the populist's statement.
as CW first pointed out in FTP-76, it's the height of doublethink to say that a Tedicare choice will be terrible AND will put private insurance out of business. either it will be worse and people won't choose it, or it will be better, in which case it will be BETTER. either way, the patient wins.
You would be correct, IF....
IF the only issue that drives a customer's choice is the quality of the care..
However, we both know that, for the majority of the people that DunselCare is, ostensibly, designed to help, the overriding factor is cost. DunselCare will likely be much cheaper than competing insurances. Therefore, people will flock to it. The domino effect will start killing off other insurance companies that are actually BETTER (quality-wise) than DunselCare. Those that DIDN'T flock to DunselCare will lose their current insurance due to these bankruptcies and be forced to take the only viable alternative. DunselCare..
In this all too likely scenario, the patients lose, the medical services lose and the insurance companies lose.
The only winner here is big and intrusive government.
Is THAT what we want???
David,
And also seriously, yes to more competition!
But that's just the problem.
DunselCare isn't competition.
Do you HONESTLY believe that a government run Insurance will abide by the same laws and regulations it makes for the rest of the industry??
Of course not.
The ONLY way that DunselCare would be TRUE competition is if it played by the same rules that exist for the insurance industry.
It won't so it's not.
Michale.....
Michale -
Still confident that "DunselCare" (as you charmingly call it) is dead for the year? Or, perchance, would you like to hedge your bets?
:-)
-CW
Still confident that "DunselCare" (as you charmingly call it) is dead for the year? Or, perchance, would you like to hedge your bets?
I haven't seen anything substantial to indicate it has grown in it's chances of making it to Obama's desk. Do you have a little birdie that I am not privvy to?? :D
I'll probably modify my prediction after the Senate debates the Baucus version.
One thing I can state with utter certainty is that there will be no Public Option. Or, at the very least, a Public Option that everyone sane agrees is nothing like a Public Option. :D
Michale.....