Universal health care–now
This TNR piece does a good job of summarizing why Progressives need to take the bull by the horns and advocate universal access to health care. There will be a massive ad campaign by the monied interests that currently feed off the inefficiencies in the current system to prevent substantive reform. The public needs to know the salient facts in the debate:
-
1. We pay far more for health care.
2. We don’t consume more services.
3. We lag in most measures of health.
4. Great chunks of each health care dollar is wasted in administrative overhead because of our bizarre patchwork system.
5. Public sector entities like the VA and Medicare are much more efficient.
6. The current reliance on employment based insurance is unraveling.
7. The current system is grossly unfair.
8. “Market” based reforms will make the situation worse.
TNR ends the editorial with this:
The other reason universal health care may seem an unconventional suggestion is because it is an “old” idea. The first proposals for universal health care surfaced at the end of the Progressive era, nearly a century ago. But “old” is not the same thing as “bad,” and time has only made universal health care more relevant, not less. During the twentieth century, this country saved capitalism not only from its foes abroad but also from its deficiencies at home–chief among them its tendency to visit catastrophe on a few unlucky souls. While the foreign threat to capitalism has subsided, the domestic inadequacies are becoming severe once again, as pensions and job security vanish in the hyper-competitive global economy. The historic solution to this problem was to insulate individuals from excessive risk. And, while the private sector once did this for health care, it’s no longer up to the task. Government isn’t the best way to provide all Americans with health security. It’s the only way. And it’s time for liberalism to say so openly.
