It should be simple -- if the conservatives would just give up their ideology of government-is-the-problem and their determination to defeat Obama at all costs. That's a tall order, I know. But if approached rationally, their arguments just don't hold up.
In today's AJC were two opinion pieces, one by the president of the Medical Association of GA, Dr. Todd Williamson, and one by conservative columnist Kyle Wingfield.
Williamson has two main arguments against the public option plan:
(1) It "will result in government-run health care. . . . Medicare . . . illustrates this danger -- having effectively evolved into the only health insurance option for seniors."Yes, and why is that a problem? Polls indicate that seniors are largely satisfied with Medicare. In fact, one of the rallying cries from even the radical anti-Obama fans is, "keep your hands off my Medicare." Polls show that the type of health care plan that people are most satisfied with are the Veteran's Administration Health Care and Medicare, both government run programs.
(2) "We are opposed to the "public option" because it is tantamount to having our patients relinquish those freedoms (choice about their health care and doctors) to cost savings-driven bureaucrats."Now this one is just plain ludicrous. It sounds good. But here are the facts. Medicare allows patients to choose their own doctors, limited only by doctors who choose to opt out of the system and not take any Medicare patients. And who is it that limits what care people can get and which doctors are on their panels? Private insurance companies. Most of the horror stories we hear about health care are not about Medicare but about private insurance that denies claims and cancels policies -- get this -- decisions made by "cost savings-driven" clerks.
Just look in the mirror, Dr. Williamson. Read your own words, and THINK !!
Kyle Wingfield is no more reflective about what he writes:
"But Democrats have all the votes they need for health reform if they can convince the public -- not to mention all of their own members -- that a government-run "public option" for health insurance is about pragmatism and not ideology."Well, he has a point about "all of their own members," aka Blue Dog Democrats.
But convincing the public?
Two recent polls asked the question:
"Do you favor creating a public health insurance option that would compete with private insurers?"I'd say the public is not only on board but eager. It's the politicians and the moneyed interests who need convincing. But let's at least be honest about what the public wants. You can't gauge that by whipping up people's fear and anger, and then measuring how much time the video clips of their antics play on 24/7 cable tv.
CNN/Opinion Research poll of Aug 28-31: favor 55%, oppose 41%.
CBS News poll of Aug 27-31: favor 60%, oppose 34%.
Those are pretty huge margins in favor (14% and 26%) for an issue on which opponents claim we are sharply divided. Apparently we are not.
What we are is drowned out by loud, lying louts.
Ralph
No comments:
Post a Comment