LITTLE ROCK — As the battle for health insurance reform fades slowly into the distance, it is hard to remember a more needlessly uncivil encounter.
This is the end game, and things could change quickly.
In one sense, it would appear that the uniquely American system of divided government, along with its checks and balances, is working just fine. The United States is designed to function at a snail’s pace, taking the people’s will into account as expressed through elected representatives organized according to state jurisdictions.
A purely democratic structure would not take a Ben Nelson or a Blanche Lincoln into account. Part of the genius of this configuration is its inherent respect for minority opinion. This has generally worked well, except for that little tiff over slavery.
Today, facing the most important legislative action in our lifetime, a fair number of representatives seem acutely fixated on the desires of insurance and drug companies. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Lincoln has received $325,350 in contributions from the health industry as of June 30. It is reported that employees and the political action committee at Blue Cross Blue Shield have, so far this year, gave over $29,000 to her re-election campaign for the U.S. Senate.
As the last lines of this lament are being penned, there are vast differences between Senate and House versions of reform proposals. The Senate has removed the public option and backed off from a suggestion to lower the age for Medicare eligibility to 55. Insurance companies reportedly would be allowed to increase premiums for older persons by 300 percent. So where’s the reform?
Progressives like former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean have argued for the defeat of what appears to be an emerging catastrophe. Perhaps the situation can be best described in terms of the risk-reward ratio. There is an admitted peril present for any significant change. All of the fiscal projections are just sophisticated guesses. If we were to take the risk of passing health insurance reform, there had best be a darned good reward on the other side.
That is exactly why the loss of any public option or Medicare buy-in for older workers is such a disastrous miscalculation. The emerging alternative appears to constitute a considerable income redistribution in favor of the medical industry. While the price for consumers goes up, cost containment appears to have been cast aside.
To her credit, Lincoln has talked agood game on containing expenses, and this should be a controlling aspect of the ongoing discussion.
What we have so far is a bubbling pot of public policy stew with 535 angry chefs. If this thing turns out to be inedible, toss it. Theremay, however, still be a slight chance for sensible legislation that provides competition and decent coverage, but time is running out.
Democrats are taking an unnecessary chance by passing a bill just because we have been at for months. Nor should they be overcome by sympathy for President Obama. He has three years left on this term and a solid chance at four more.
Health insurance premiums are headed up again next year and that will harm already stressed individuals and small businesses. One overlooked aspect in this tumultuous conversation is the high cost of doing nothing. Former President Bill Clinton has madethis observation and he is correct.
Clinton also claims, if I am understanding his commentary, that Congress should pass something because not doing so will be a missed opportunity. He points to the 1994 health initiative that was summarily shot down by the usual special interests.
What he fails to take into account is that the current situation is much worse than the golden age of his presidency. Legislation to deal with medical costs will soon be back on the national agenda because of the sizable increases in premiums and drug costs.
Many Democratic strategists are failing to project themselves into the autumn of 2010 when memories have faded and voters recollect the tea parties and the Republicans who killed a necessary item of reform. If this law passes without the essential elements, Democrats will be forced to answer for next year’s skyrocketing medical costs, and they will deserve to be runout for failing to provide meaningful changes.
Arkansas’ senators will play a key role. Lincoln and Mark Pryor have an affirmative duty to save the Democratic Party and crush anything that does not include meaningfulmeasurable reform.
Lincoln has given herself sufficient semantic space in which to cast that idea. She is reported to have said, “I would not support a solely government-funded public option. We can’t afford that.” Solely government-funded? Hmm. There’s enough semantic space there to park a dozen B-52 bombers. It might even come to pass that some medical interests could fit inside that spacious structure. Let the negotiations continue.
-
———◊-
———
Free-lance columnist Pat Lynch has been a radio broadcaster in Central Arkansas for more than 20 years.
Editorial, Pages 15 on 12/21/2009