Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Compromising Health Care Reform


This week the Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus introduced a health care reform plan that would not add to the federal deficit. The bill does not include a public option (AKA government funded health care), a key element of reforming health care according to President Obama and fellow democrats. At least it used to be a key element. Recently President Obama has said that the public option is not absolutely necessary to reach his goals for reform.

Many people have acknowledged that passing health care reform has a "make it or break it" stigma attached to the success or failure of President Obama's presidency. Is President Obama loosening his belt on his goals for health care reform simply so that he can say he was successful? Is he letting the main component of reform, a public option, slip under the table so that he can say he passed health care reform legislation? Is gaining a few Republican supporters worth erasing such a key element from the bill? Negotiating, compromising, and reaching a common solution is extremely important for passing partisan legislation, but is health care reform really something that can be compromised? These are all important questions we must ask ourselves.

Furthermore, another questionable aspect of Baucus' proposal is the idea of mandated health care coverage. In other words, if an individual is not insured they could receive a fine. The bill does create health care exchanges, non-profit health insurance cooperatives, and sets limits on out-of-pocket expenses, but should we really be fining people if they can't afford health care insurance.

The Baucus plan is definitely a step in the right direction, but much more work needs to be done if we are going to pass serious health care reform. This plan estimates to cover nearly 30 million uninsured Americans While nearly 50 million Americans remain uninsured. We can do better. America can do better.