******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Holiday Rush Towards Single Payer

In recent days Democrats started floating the idea of a "Medicare Buy-In" proposal, and as of last night, there appears to be a deal, although the details are not fully known. I addressed the lack of merits in a prior post.

What is critical is that this is being done behind closed doors, with a CBO scoring being obtained before the details are released to the public. If Reid thinks the score helps, there will be a mad push to pass a bill before Christmas, in less than two weeks.

Once again, the Democrats are making clear their fear of the public. If the Democrats wanted a massive expansion of Medicare, Democrats could have rolled that out in one of the numerous committee and full House and Senate bills which have been debated for months. (The status of the further expansion of Medicaid -- above and beyond the estimated 15 million person expansion already in Reid's bill -- is unclear.)

Instead, at the last minute, we have another mad rush of the goal line. What correctly was termed the final scrum:
This brings you to the final stage, the scrum. This is the set of all-night meetings ... when all the different pieces actually get put together.

You want the scrum to be quick so that the bill is passed before some of the interests groups realize that they’ve been decapitated. You want the scrum to be frantic so you can tell your allies that their reservations might destroy the whole effort (this is how you are going to get the liberals to water down the public plan and the moderates to loosen their fiscal rectitude).
The Stimulus Bill was the model. A deal done in secret, rolled out quickly, and passed in haste out of fear of the public reaction.

Harry Reid's despicable and unapologetic use of the race card -- comparing opponents of his proposals to slave owners -- reflects this fear. The disdain for the public is palpable.

The implications will be clear. We will be on a straight path to a single payer system, and much sooner than anyone imagined just a couple of weeks ago. Ezra Klein has it right on this point about lowering the Medicare age to 55:
The national non-profits [in the proposal] are not exactly like, but not that far from, the compromised public plan in the House version of the bill. They won't be publicly run, but with the OPM regulating them tightly and carefully choosing which offerings are accepted into the market, the impact might not be that different in practice. They have the advantages of offering a single product nationally and being freed from the profit motive, both of which were key to the theory of the weaker public option. Indeed, they're like publicly-regulated utilities more than private plans....

Meanwhile, the Medicare buy-in lets people in the broader insurance market see what national bargaining power can do for individual premiums. Right now, Medicare's rates are largely hidden, as no one pays the full premiums, and so no one can really compare it to private offerings. But if the premiums become visible, and Medicare's superior bargaining power is capable of offering rates 20 to 30 percent lower than its private competitors can muster, we'll see how long it is before representatives begin getting calls from 50-year-olds who'd like the opportunity to exchange money in return for insurance as good as what 55-year-olds can get.
That is the logical path. Increase the Medicaid rolls by 15 million as the current bill does, increase those participating in Medicare by a 10-year age bracket, subsidized tens of millions of others, and what is left before people not on the public dole demand their handout? And the necessity of going on the dole will be compelling because of the destruction of the private market which cannot compete on price with a government-run, ultimately taxpayer-backed, program.

In one fell swoop, in the dark of night in a holiday rush, Harry Reid and Barack Obama will have put us on the path to the single payer system they really want.

The fact that we cannot afford the current Medicare system, well that is just a detail. And will serve as the justification for government-determined rationing once a majority of the population is living off the government.

If Harry Reid gets this done, call him Harry Houdini, because he will have pulled a single payer system out of a holiday hat.

Update 12-10-09: In a similar vein, House Democrat: Senate public option “compromise” is a total victory for fans of … single-payer and now this from the Washington Post:
However, the last-minute introduction of this idea within the broader context of health reform raises numerous questions -- not least of which is whether this proposal is a far more dramatic step toward a single-payer system than lawmakers on either side realize....

The irony of this late-breaking Medicare proposal is that it could be a bigger step toward a single-payer system than the milquetoast public option plans rejected by Senate moderates as too disruptive of the private market.
Related Posts:
Deception and Tyranny Key To Health Care Reform
Latest Health Care Wolf In Sheep's Clothing Inside A Trojan Horse
Harry Reid Plays Every "ism" Card

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook


  1. "While half of all Americans will require legalcare services in any given year, almost 280 million Americans lack legal insurance. For those few Americans who do have legal insurance coverage, most plans only cover a limited number of attorney visits and fail to provide coverage for preexisting situations such as divorce proceedings, custody cases, bankruptcy, or cases involving alcohol or drugs, thus exposing hardworking families to unlimited financial liabilities.

    "We must require law firms and attorneys to accept clients with pre-existing legal problems (to include recalcitrant criminal behavior, drug and alcohol addictions, and civil problems such as complicated divorce and custody battles), at fair reimbursement rates set by the Department of Legal Services. We can no longer allow attorneys and firms to accept easy or lucrative cases while dismissing those who cannot pay, or who suffer from challenging legal conditions."

    -- http://www.jpands.org/vol14no4/rice.pdf
    -- http://www.SinglePayerLegal.org

  2. Paul and others,

    It seems to be easily forgotten that healthcare is a human need.

    Furthermore, we seem to forget easily that no free market principles apply to the healthcare industry. Monopolies do exist, right now in many states. That's according to the American Medical Association.

    I want the mother, with a child, who was told by her doctor she needs cancer drugs to have that treatment. No company, businessman or rule should say she cannot have a doctor ordered treatment.

    Nonprofit healthcare is sustainable and more effective for an ever aging society. Even today, a man 60 years old couldn't afford individual health insurance when laid off, it may cost $600 - $1,000 per month. Would you like him to deplete his savings? Put it on a credit card? Home Equity Line of Credit?

    We cannot keep mortgaging our future on the false premise that change is "too disruptive." America was founded on revolution. Let's not become so "American," with our foreign cards, furniture and clothes, that we forget the brand.