What health care reform could reasonably look like- and how it could be sold

[depakid]

Earlier, I posted a long take by Drew Westen, Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University- a guy who- like Lakoff, has researched how political thought and behavior actually works in real life.

Many likely didn't get to the conclusion- so despite spilt milk misgivings about whether it will be adopted now (as many of us have been saying- and from the outset working for in their own ways) here it is:

So is there a way out?

Yes. Go back to the core principles that Americans are enthusiastic about for a reason, and go back to a plan closer to what the president campaigned on that matches them. It can be achieved through reconciliation, just as can the current White House plan. And Democrats just might keep the House.

Principle 1: If you like your doctor or like your current plan, this plan won't affect you. You can keep them. We will not tax middle class plans or set up incentives for insurance companies to eliminate high-quality plans. To cover or subsidize working Americans or those who've lost their jobs and can't afford quality insurance, we will impose a progressive tax starting with individuals who make $500,000 or more or families with earnings above $1 million per year, allow reimportation of drugs from Canada, and negotiate prescription drug prices for people on Medicare just as we do in the VA system. Much of that is in the House bill.

Principle 2: We will give Americans more choices, rather than less, starting with high minimum standards for any company wanting to sell health insurance, including an end to discrimination against people for being sick, arbitrary termination of coverage for people who have been paying their premiums but have gotten sick and now actually need their insurance, or arbitrary rate hikes. We will allow people to shop around among private insurers in whatever ways maximize competition, and allow any American to buy into Medicare for a competitive price. We know that Medicare works and gets high approval ratings from our parents and grandparents. There is no reason to create any new "public option."

Principle 3: No man, woman, or child in America will ever have to worry again about being without health insurance or medical care. People who have lost a job, own a small business or employ others in that business, or work full-time but can't afford health insurance will be able to buy a plan on an open exchange that includes both private plans that meet high minimum standards and Medicare. If a co-op can create a competitive plan, let it create a competitive plan. If a union or the Chamber of Commerce can create a competitive plan, let it create a competitive plan.

Subsidies for those who need them will be funded by the insurance industry (which will have millions of new customers), the pharmaceutical industry (which will have millions of new customers), and millionaires (who were favored disproportionately by the Bush tax cuts and are doing just fine, thank you). Plans that meet the standards for participation in the exchange should be vetted and available by January 2011, not 2013, and Medicare should be available for purchase by the same date. Children whose parents can't afford health care will remain covered by the children's health insurance plan signed into law a year ago, which is already paid for, which will keep additional costs down for those who need subsidies.

This simple proposal -- three principles, three paragraphs -- is not all that different from the president's plan, except that it is fair to the middle class, pays for itself immediately (not in 2018 when the "Cadillac tax" kicks in, presuming some Congress and president at that point decide it's in their interest to pay a debt created by a Congress and president nearly a decade earlier, which is highly unlikely), and would be widely popular. It is easier to understand and easier to implement. It is also rooted clearly in values -- choice, fairness, competition, a healthy life for all Americans -- that make it very difficult to attack.

It is difficult to imagine a Democrat voting against it. And it is equally difficult to imagine a Republican attack on it that "sticks." But this time, it might be good to prepare just in case.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/drew-westen/the-way-forward-on-health_b_489387.html

[Clio the Leo]

1. good read. thank you. NT