The Democratic caucus may have a majority, but DINOs (Democrats in name only) have been trying to appease their Republican friends in the Senate to nix any and all possibilities of giving Americans a choice on whether they want a public or private health care plan. Allies of private insurance groups (like all Republicans, Sen. Max Baucus(D), Sen. Conrad (D) and other conserva-dems) protest that a government-run health care plan would cost more money and put bureaucrats between you and your doctor (as opposed to the bureaucrats that work at Cigna, Blue Cross, Aetna and so on). However, when the plan is actually thoroughly studied, we see a different reality from the naysayers spin.
From Yahoo News:
In our society, competition is a healthy thing for the economy. Why opponents who generally like the free-market (or so they say) want to limit consumers' choice is just a bit confusing. I guess they can toss aside their principles when a nice fat campaign check will suffice.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A nationwide health insurance exchange that includes a Medicare-like government option could save $1.8 trillion more than if only private plans are offered, a prominent private U.S. health policy group said on Wednesday.
Federal spending on health-related costs would still rise from 2010 to 2020, but they would be less with a plan that pays doctors and hospital rates similar to the Medicare program for the elderly and disabled, according to a report by the.
The New York-based health policy research group compared possible savings a health insurance exchange could bring under three different scenarios. One would include a Medicare-like plan along with private insurance. Another would instead offer a government-run plan with rates somewhat higher than Medicare. The final one would be private insurance with no government plan at all.
Of course, both sides know that a public option will ultimately benefit Americans who want good, quality health care. The difference is that one side wants people to have it, and the other doesn't.