I was recently asked what I think were the reasons behind the passage of the health care bill.
While I believe there were a few Republican legislators with good market centered ideas for the reform of the health insurance industry, I think the general Republican opposition to the bill as written, while justified, played right into Obama's hand and is the primary reason for passage.
The Republican party had the chance to put forth a comprehensive market centered bill and promote it to the public. In other words, offer a positive, market centered solution to health insurance abuse which could stand up to any criticism the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumpverte might throw at it. Instead they offered small adjustments or the "scrap it and start over" BS argument.
"We The People" will suffer as a result of this strategy for the balance of our lifetimes, in all likelihood, because there is no way this all inclusive plan will cut the deficit or in any way decrease the cost of health care.
I will offer a personal example: Being a self employed entrepreneur it has been very hard for me to obtain a competitive insurance policy. I found my best option to be a policy which includes a Health Savings Account of $5,000.00 with the insurance company picking up annual costs after this account has been extinguished. Now I find that under this comprehensive "cost reducing" health care overhaul, the $5,000 deductible, HSA policy is being eliminated in favor of a much less comprehensive policy with a lower deductible, but much higher monthly cost. So much for keeping the policy you have, if you like it. My monthly cost of health care has increased and my choice in policies has decreased.
In a recent NY Times article the following question was asked:
All this raises a question that goes well beyond the health care debate: can the Republicans make any progress, in Congress or at the polls in November, with that ‘Party of No’ label?
I respond yes and no --
Yes they will lose seats due to the general anger at the house and senate. There will be massive turnover which will hit both parties and because there are currently more D's than R's, there will be more turnover with the D's.
No they won't make headway on the "Party of No" label. If repeal of the health care bill becomes the battle cry in a one pony show, the Republican candidates will not gain in either the house or senate.
The gain, if there is to be a unified one issue campaign across America will come if the issue is deficits and public debt, but only if they present a comprehensive, solutions based action plan.
Think Newt's "Contract with America" focused on deficit and debt reduction. Of course, health care must be included in that mix with well researched examples of the cost increases, but the primary focus MUST be deficit and debt reduction if the Republican party is going to blunt the "Party of No" label and gain traction.
Remember, James Carvelles famous quote "It's the economy stupid"! History shows that it's always the economy and as David Frum points out in the article, the economy will be a bit better come November so the focus of opposing candidates MUST be the effect of deficits and public debt on the economy if they are to make any headway.
My continuing observation is that the incumbants know the voting public has a very short attention span so they can get away with quite a bit today in the belief that the public will forget by the time election day comes around. Health Care will be old news by the majority during the mid term cycle. The voters will not forget about deficits and public debt if candidates remind the voters in a dramatric manner, what the incumbents have allowed to occur.
Posts
