Saturday, October 17, 2009

Spend And Deliver | The New Republic

by The New Republic Editors

Congress has been formally debating health care reform for almost nine months. And the country, as a whole, has been debating it for years. But now that the last congressional committee with jurisdiction has approved legislation, lawmakers are confronting the essential conundrum that's bedeviled this issue all along: Their desire to expand health insurance coverage exceeds their willingness to pay for it. As deliberations move to the House and Senate floors, then on to conference-committee negotiations, something has to give.
. . . . . . .
It's possible that everybody is posturing in order to gain maximum bargaining power for the conference-committee negotiations-which is where, quite possibly, the final deal on money will come together. If that happens, finding additional revenue will be possible. But it's just as possible that Congress will further cut funding and that the White House will say OK. On the Finance Committee, Schumer and Snowe partnered on amendments to weaken the requirement that people buy insurance. Without more money on the table and a better set of insurance options-including, ideally a public plan-there will be pressure to weaken that requirement further.

The argument is that it's not fair to make people buy insurance when it's too expensive and doesn't cover enough. That's true. But the answer is to make insurance more affordable and more protective, not to let more people out of the requirement. Make no mistake: A bill with less funding is a bill that helps fewer people. That's bad policy and, by the way, bad politics, too.
Read More
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

No comments:

Post a Comment