Republicans Compare Public Option To Hurricane Katrina
Congressional Republicans have released an outline of what they call the Patients' Choice Act--their alternative to health care legislation due shortly out of both the Senate Finance Committee and the Committee and Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. They will refer to this in the coming weeks as they attempt to defeat Democratic reform efforts, and, at the very least, it's a much more thorough document than was, say, the House GOP's alternative budget, which was mocked loudly all across the capital.
More on the merits later. (As a sneak peak, the PCA, like the Republican budget, includes a predictable scheme to turn Medicare into a boon for private insurers.)
But of course, with Republicans out of power, this plan is mostly meant to serve rhetorical purposes--it's not really a plausible direction for health reform under Democratic rule. If you're looking for some insight into how they plan to attack the forthcoming legislation, though, it's a pretty good primer.
For instance, it warns that "[t]he federal government would run a health care system--or a public plan option--with the compassion of the IRS, the efficiency of the post office, and the incompetence of Katrina."
Republicans seem to be making a habit of attacking rivals by reminding everybody of how badly they botched their handling Katrina. Which, I suppose, must make Democrats happy. But I've gotta admit, I really don't understand the angle. On substance, the government fully runs one health care system--the Veterans Health Administration--and it's considered to be just about the best system in the country.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Patients Choice Act? Is this 1984? It should be called "The Insurance Company will screw you over Act" if they wanted to call it what it is. I guess the GOP is taking it's cue from Fox "Fair and Balanced" News...
May 20, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone -- such as the inept brainless MSM -- might want to point out the huge contradiction here:
If a public plan is sooooo horrible (nightmarish waits, denials of service, incpmetent bureaucrats, etc. etc.) then why not let it compete with the private ones. The private plans should prevail, if they are actually good and efficient.
What is so wrong with creating some healthy competition, especially if "socialized medicine" is so unattractive to the public?
What do we have to do to get this point made the next time some GOP clown is scaremongering on the TV? You can't have it both ways: either a public plan would be horrible, or it would be too good and hurt the private ones by providing better care cheaper. Which is it? And if it is the latter, the private plans have some explaining to do.
May 20, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been wondering the same thing. In one breath they proclaim that any government-run plan will be HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE. In the very next breath they insist that people will flock to it and private plans won't be able to compete. The Dems need to point out this contradiction at every opportunity. They also need to remind people that we already have a government-run health care plan (Medicare) and people who have it like it just fine.
May 20, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Medicare spends about 5% of its funds on admin and overhead.
Your typical private company spends around 20-30%, because of underwriting, attempts to deny coverage, legal and marketing. (And don't forget nice salaries for the suits and hefty bonuses for the parasitic CEO types)
But god forbid the lobotomized automatons we see on TV -- Wolf Blitzer etc -- could be capable of spotting this glaring contradiction.
May 20, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats are falling behind on the PR battle. As usual. There are now ads running in Connecticut on cable (and maybe network--not sure) highlighting individuals who have had relatives die because they had to wait until they received approval for drugs or treatment, and that this situation is going to get MUCH worse if health care is nationalized.
As for using the imagery of Katrina? That's hardly surprising, given that Republicans want to blame Obama for the deficit. They're banking, correctly I suspect, on the media not really doing its job.
May 20, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah maybe but maybe it will backfire ny reminding people how bad everything is right now.
May 20, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Part of the reason the Bush Administration was so incompetent is that they subscribed to an ideology that government never works, so they had no incentive to try to make it work. If government failed, it just "proved" that they were right. They just can't seem to let go of that idea, or grasp that outside the wingnut bubble, everyone knows that Katrina was a major screwup on their part, not an inherent failure of government in general.
I hope they never learn.
May 20, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
But I don't think Katrina was an accident. They wanted to prove that government can't get anything done. And their using Katrina to bash health care reform is further evidence.
May 20, 2009 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone also should point out that the reference itself is moronic - "Katrina" was not incompetent. In fact, as hurricanes go, she displayed remarkable competence. The reference should be to the RESPONSE to Katrina.
May 20, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the public option is Katrina, then does that imply the Republicans will be powerless to stop it?
May 20, 2009 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
In fact, as hurricanes go, she displayed remarkable competence.
LOL!
A veritable role model for hurricanes!
May 20, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey wow- doesn't the Gubmint issue a paycheck to thousands of people every week?
Compare that to the frequency of medical claims.
Doesn't everyone know the RNC just wants to obstruct. They want to complain about paying taxes for nothing, so when we give ourselves something in return they get nervous. People might think the whole crowd are insane obstruction fetishists.
May 20, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo!
And VA health care is fully socialized medicine, not unlike what they have in the U.K. All doctors, nurses, etc., are VHA employees. So it not only goes far beyond what President Obama proposes to do -- it even goes far beyond what single-payer advocates propose to do.
But the answer to the GOPosaurs inane rhetoric is VA health care and Medicare. Proof that government does health care better -- and more efficiently -- than the private sector.
May 20, 2009 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP is like some abusive alcoholic who badmouths other people by calling them a "miserable no-good drunk like me".
May 20, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would definitely laugh at this if it didn't make me weep.
May 20, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans are out of power? Since when? Seriously, I'm sure President Cheney and the republican-led Congress would be very surprised to hear that.
May 20, 2009 10:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone also should disk out that the recommendation itself is moronic - "Katrina" was not inept. In fact, as hurricanes go, she displayed extraordinary ability. The denotation should be to the Activity to Katrina.
__________________________
Peter
Compare ISA
June 6, 2010 5:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone also should disk out that the recommendation itself is moronic - "Katrina" was not inept. In fact, as hurricanes go, she displayed extraordinary ability. The denotation should be to the Activity to Katrina.
__________________________
Peter
Compare ISA
June 6, 2010 5:18 AM | Reply | Permalink