A Concise Argument for a Health Insurance Bill

The NYTimes today has a perfectly reduced, succinct, direct and thoughtful explanation about why Congress must pass health care legislation in the next few weeks or risk the continued rush toward financial and moral bankruptcy of our system. It's here and it's a must-read for anybody listening to the Republican talking points based on fear and bad information.

A couple of highlights:

• Insurance companies would compete for your business and everybody would be covered, one way or another. People on the lower end of the income spectrum would get their health insurance free or at reduced cost and insurers would have to cover pre-existing conditions.
• The 46 million Americans without insurance is likely to rise to 57 million in nine years (CBO estimates) without legislation. The uninsured are a heavy burden on the insured (ask Carilion Clinic) and that burden would intensify. Somebody has to pay for those emergency room visits.
• "My insurance is good; I don't want to lose it." You won't and it's likely that your coverage will be as good and your rates lower. (Anthem of California recently raised rates by nearly 40 percent.)
• Cost would be contained: "... the Senate bill would reduce deficits over the first 10 years by $132 billion and even more in the second decade." The bill would more than pay for itself, in spite of what the Republicans are saying.

I'm not satisfied with the bills in Congress because I want full socialized medicine--guaranteed health care for all--but this is a solid, thoughtful and workable compromise that Americans will love, as they simply adore Social Security and Medicare.

The Republicans remain a serious threat to kill any progress here because it is so much easier to stand on the side and shout "No!" than it is to work toward a common goal. Change is hard and by their very nature, Republicans resist it at every turn. But right now, we have very little choice.