Opt in or opt out — let’s flip a coin

According to a recent article in the Washington Post, many of the healthcare policy decisions that we think are being made in Washington will instead be made in your state capital. Is this a good thing? I think not. In my opinion, politics is about not making decisions. Politicians almost never get voted out of office for indecision or inaction. Instead, politicians get voted out of office for making decisions that are unpopular. If you have a large enough constituency it really doesn’t matter what decision you make. Someone’s not going to be happy.

So, let’s apply this to healthcare reform. It appears that the Democrats are trying to make as few decisions as possible. This way, they get maximum benefit (hey, we passed healthcare reform) with minimum blowback because the details are left up to states. In my way of thinking, this means that many of the battles that were fought in Washington need to be re-fought in Raleigh, Albany, Atlanta and Austin. Let’s assume that all states actually make decisions. The healthcare in Texas can be vastly different than the healthcare in North Dakota or in Hawaii. Is this what we wanted when we started the discussion on health care reform? Don’t think so. This is garbage. This is an unwillingness to step up to the plate and do the right thing. The Democrats should be ashamed of themselves.

From a minority perspective, states have let us down time and time again. One only has to look at civil rights, unequal pay and gender discrimination to see that states don’t always step up to the plate and do the right thing. Sometimes, states have to be forced into making the correct decision especially when it comes to the poor and minorities. This healthcare reform has everything to do with the poor and minorities. These are the groups who are most affected by no health insurance or by inadequate health insurance.

The opt in or opt out option reminds me of the Hokey Pokey. It’s a child’s game. This is not providing health care reform nationwide. This is providing an opportunity to get healthcare reform nationwide. An opportunity? I think when you live in Massachusetts or Connecticut or even Oregon you have some expectations that your state will make the right decisions with regard to healthcare. In South Carolina, there is no expectation of adequate decision-making in the state capital. The governor was using state funds to fly to Brazil and then fly home to get his hair cut, yet legislators cannot make up their mind whether he should be impeached or not. That was easy. Healthcare is hard. They’ll never be able to make the right decisions for their constituents. In Texas, the state where I grew up, I know the mindset. Many Texans believe in perfect Reaganesque fashion that all government is bad. The disadvantaged will then continue to be out in the cold while conservatives will write opinion pieces in the local papers about how Obama’s health care plans were a complete and total failure, when they in fact did not institute any healthcare reform themselves.

Democrats in the House and the Senate, what are you doing? You guys are giving me chest pain and at my age, if I mention chest pain someone’s going to throw me on a gurney and roll me into an angiography suite. We want real healthcare reform. Nationwide!

  • Joe White
    I'm not.

    But doing so would be 50x more difficult, and less likely to succeed in every instance.
  • ecthompson
    Joe - Why are you assuming that an insurance company in Florida wouldn't marshall resources from all over the country to fight such a measure?
  • Joe White
    I'm not.

    But doing so would be 50x more difficult, and less likely to succeed in every instance.
  • ecthompson
    Joe - Why are you assuming that an insurance company in Florida wouldn't marshall resources from all over the country to fight such a measure?
  • Joe White
    Then making the 'insurance lobby' multiply it's efforts by 50x will surely dilute it's effectiveness, would it not?
  • Joe White
    Then making the 'insurance lobby' multiply it's efforts by 50x will surely dilute it's effectiveness, would it not?
  • MH
    I ran into a lady signing a healthcare reform petition. She misunderstood what it was for mainly because I was talking on how it won't do any good in Utah. She told me she and her husband had 10 kids and had insurance and that she wants to be able to drop them at 21 yrs of age. She stated that she shouldn't have to help them have coverage even if they are in school. I was just shaking my head. I said so you are against health reform and she said YEP.... But her insurance costs are the same as a family of 3. The family of 3 and the family of 12pay 1200 a month for healthcare. How is that fair? She stated that ALL of her children were going to be successful and take care of themselves. Just wait until one of them gets sick without insurance. I bet she will change her mind. Utah will opt out because they have the largest families and pay the least for coverage. Why would they want that to change.
  • MH
    I ran into a lady signing a healthcare reform petition. She misunderstood what it was for mainly because I was talking on how it won't do any good in Utah. She told me she and her husband had 10 kids and had insurance and that she wants to be able to drop them at 21 yrs of age. She stated that she shouldn't have to help them have coverage even if they are in school. I was just shaking my head. I said so you are against health reform and she said YEP.... But her insurance costs are the same as a family of 3. The family of 3 and the family of 12 pay 1200 a month for healthcare. How is that fair? She stated that ALL of her children were going to be successful and take care of themselves. Just wait until one of them gets sick without insurance. I bet she will change her mind.  Utah will opt out because they have the largest families and pay the least for coverage. Why would they want that to change.
  • ecthompson
    Joe -- maybe there's a simpler reason, the insurance lobby may be too powerful for them to overcome. Please explain why single payer would be so much "more expensive." It seems to me that it would be cheaper.
  • ecthompson
    Joe -- maybe there's a simpler reason, the insurance lobby may be too powerful for them to overcome. Please explain why single payer would be so much "more expensive." It seems to me that it would be cheaper.
  • Joe White
    For those who want a single payer, the reality is that each state has always had the authority to institute it's own single payer if it wanted to, while on the federal level it is unconstitutional to do so.

    Why have 'progressive' states generally not done so? An unwillingness to own the inevitable failure IMHO. They want someone else to blame when it bankrupts them.
  • Joe White
    For those who want a single payer, the reality is that each state has always had the authority to institute it's own single payer if it wanted to, while on the federal level it is unconstitutional to do so.

    Why have 'progressive' states generally not done so? An unwillingness to own the inevitable failure IMHO. They want someone else to blame when it bankrupts them.
blog comments powered by Disqus