Obama to States: If You Can Do Health Reform Better, Go For It
This article shares a type of an opt-out plan of the health reform.
Is this a good way of making a controversial policy more of a win-win type of situation for everyone?
Don't hold back, I want to hear your ideas.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI view this as an effort to appeal to the critics but really not change anything. The article mentions the conditions for the opt out policy and they are stringent. The article mentioned that the only state that would currently be able to opt out is Massachusets, and I say bravo to them for their good work. I also think it is interesting the position that Mitt Romney is taking on his involvement in that process. I think it shows how political the debate is, and how politics can supersede personal beliefs. But I guess it is difficult for me to really say what another believes.
ReplyDeleteThe opt out is only for states that really do better. It takes out the controversial individual mandate but I see little way to make the other requirements without an opt out or heavy government subsidies.
I am a fan of the health care law to begin with and again the law is the law.
I really do not forsee this as making any changes and to be honest I don't think any changes should be made. Not to say that I believe the law is perfect, but starting to tinker with it may bring it all down and that is not worth the risk to me.
On a different not I think that the health care law should have contained more concessions. Off the top of my head the only concession I can recall is the increase to medicaid for a specific state in order to get that legislators vote. It really should have done more at the beginning in the realm of paradox as we have discussed it. I don't think that after the fact concessions should be made. I think changes could and perhaps should be made, but those should be made to improve the law. Not to garner support after it is law. Bartering for support should be in the creation.
ReplyDeleteBut that also begs the question if there would have support to get it passed. At the time the bill was criticized both for going too far and not far enough, and it barely passed. Bartering could have taken a month or two longer and in that time Senator Kennedy who was a champion for the bill would have been replaced and passing it would have proven difficult.
But I don't know. I do wonder what everyone else thinks is the best time to make concessions/barter/ etc.
I think that the proposed health care legislation is an example of the theory of paradox. It is less stringent then previous attempts by politicians at health care reform and still keeps health care and insurance privatized while still making provisions for providing everyone health insurance. Though insurance companies and drug companies (who frequently post high profits) may not completly agree with the bill it still presents a middle ground on an issue that is truly life and death.
ReplyDelete