The Denver Post comes out today with a strong stand on the importance of the public option to meaningful health care reform. Perhaps the most surprising part? A substantial media outlet shrugs off the importance of false bipartisanship on this issue:
The Obama administration and congressional Democrats need to push forward with their plan to pass a public option as part of a comprehensive health care overhaul when they return to Washington next month. We don’t see how it works without one.
It is the best way to slow escalating health care costs and expand access to quality care. The country, ultimately, will lose if the public option vanishes because of Democratic efforts to make health care reform a bipartisan effort.
Wow. Emphasis mine, and color me . . . impressed. Bipartisanship requires real effort and real measures on both sides, not simple obstructionism. Not only does the Post go all in on getting health care reform with a public option done, but the paper reminds readers of a relevant fact or two along the way:
A publicly run plan would allow government to administer insurance on a non-profit basis, contracting with hospitals and providers on rates, much as it does with Medicare.
Publicly run insurance would almost certainly spend less on administration than private insurance. A study by the Urban Institute puts Medicare and Medicaid administrative costs at about 5 percent, while private plans spend about 12 percent.
Some critics talk about government-run health care as if it were a great unknown. The truth is, government-run health care already covers about a third of Americans through Medicaid, Medicare, veterans’ care, and the military. These are highly utilized programs, and while not without troubles, have track records of providing good care.
Emphasis mine. Good to see the paper use its voice to drive some key points home.
No Comments so far ↓
Comments are closed.