An important debate is brewing within the progressive community about the current state of health care reform..while we all agree that the Senate bill is disappointing and unacceptable, we differ vastly on whether we should support it..
I don’t know…I am trying to see both side of the argument and it gets hard sometimes. I think progressives, like tea baggers, tend to shout down people that we don’t agree with. We start to accuse them of betraying their liberal and progressive ideologies. The good thing is that we have many voices within the progressive community unlike the tea baggers.
I don’t think the answer is as clear as black and white. I don’t think we can dismiss something simply because it is not perfect or what we want. I also don’t hold the illusion that just because we control the legislative and executive branch, we can get what we want.
There are a lot of arguments against this current reform and people like Andy Stern of SEIU are coming out against it. I absolutely agree that we should do what we can to improve the bill. However, at some point, this bill will either be killed or go to a vote.
You can find plenty of arguments for killing the bill on the net. Here are a couple of bloggers discussing why we should support the passage even if we think it’s unacceptable..I think I’m picking writing from familiar progressive voices and not people out of no where.
Paul Krugman wrote:
There’s enormous disappointment among progressives about the emerging health care bill — and rightly so. That said, even as it stands it would take a big step toward greater security for Americans and greater social justice; it would also save many lives over the decade ahead.
Kevin Drum from Mother Jones brings up good points about this current form of health care reform:
If healthcare reform dies this year, it dies for a good long time. Say what you will about the Democratic leadership, but Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi, and Steny Hoyer all know this perfectly well. So do John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. (Boy do they know it.) But if it passes, here’s what we get:
- Insurers have to take all comers. They can’t turn you down for a preexisting condition or cut you off after you get sick.
- Community rating. Within a few broad classes, everyone gets charged the same amount for insurance.
- Individual mandate. I know a lot of liberals hate this, but how is it different from a tax? And its purpose is sound: it keeps the insurance pool broad and insurance rates down.
- A significant expansion of Medicaid.
- Subsidies for low and middle income workers that keeps premium costs under 10% of income.
- Limits on ER charges to low-income uninsured emergency patients.
- Caps on out-of-pocket expenses.
- A broad range of cost-containment measures.
- A dedicated revenue stream to support all this.
What’s more, for the first time we get a national commitment to providing healthcare coverage for everyone. It won’t be universal to start, unfortunately, but it’s going to be a lot easier to get there once the marker is laid down. That’s how every other country has done it, and that’s how we did it with Social Security and Medicare, both of which had big gaps in coverage when they were first passed.
This is where I am struggling…I don’t know if we are letting our emotions cloud our better judgement. Are the consequences of killing this bill and doing nothing better than the future that this reform would create? What are the chances of reform in the future if we were to use our pressure and kill it today? What is the right pace for progress? Is it taking one giant leap or taking multiple smaller steps?
I don’t know
Eric
kaptain151
