Contemporary conservatives are partisans of America’s libertarian traditions. And understandably, given the outcome-based orientation of liberals’ egalitarian commitments, they are wary of embracing the American heritage of social equality.
But President Obama’s performance on ABC last night demonstrates that conservatives ignore the power of egalitarian arguments to their detriment.
Without question, the most damaging moment for Obama came when he acknowledged that in spite of the rationing implicit in his public health care plan, he would still pay out-of-pocket to obtain the best health care for his family. As reported by ABC’s Jake Tapper, “President Obama struggled to explain today whether his health care reform proposals would force normal Americans to make sacrifices that wealthier, more powerful people – like the president himself – wouldn’t face.”
Though it is not in the standard Republican playbook, the opponents of Obamacare should argue that his program is fundamentally unfair and at odds with America’s egalitarian commitments. Assuming that Republicans are correct, and the creation of a public-plan will lead to the collapse, rather than invigoration, of private health insurance, the end result of Obamacare will be a massive shift from an employer-based system of private health insurance toward government-provided care.
And Republicans need to note at every opportunity that after this transition takes place, the rich and powerful will still be able to get all the care they want. Last night the President spoke about the need to ration care to bring down costs. That can only be done in a public system. Those who have access to private health care will still have their choice of doctors, hospitals, and procedures.
In other words, Obamacare, contrary to its promise, will entrench rather than eliminate the Two Americas, maintaining a system of private coverage for the rich, and imposing a government bureaucracy that rations care on the middle class.
If conservatives go against type and embrace an egalitarian critique of Obamacare, they just might win over the middle class threatened by a public plan.
6 responses so far
1 balconesfault // Jun 25, 2009 at 11:25 am
I don’t get it. What would keep private insurers from making, in essence, insurance “rider” policies available to the middle class?
Or, if a lot of middle class families don’t feel their needs will be served by subjecting themselves to the bureaucracy and rationing of the public option, why wouldn’t they continue to subject themselves to the bureaucracy and rationing currently offered by their private insurers?
Personally, I can’t see why this wouldn’t happen. I have faith in the innovative powers of the free market – so if a substantial number of middle class families want to take advantage of a cost competitive public option, but want to guarantee that government bureaucracy doesn’t get in the way of them getting higher level or more immediate treatments than the public system will provide – why would a private company not write policies for this?
Yes, there is no doubt that a public option will change the way insurance looks 10 years from now. But that’s the whole point, isn’t it? As long as the government doesn’t subsidize the public option far more heavily than it currently does private insurance coverage, or flat out out-law private coverage, I have faith that the actors in the marketplace will discover new ways to make money through innovative insurance products.
2 ottovbvs // Jun 25, 2009 at 11:46 am
Clay with his gold plated govt healthcare plan gives us another lecture on the dire outcome should Obama pass a universal plan.
“Though it is not in the standard Republican playbook, the opponents of Obamacare should argue that his program is fundamentally unfair and at odds with Americas egalitarian commitments. “
……The present system of course is fundamentally fair and completely consistent with egalitarian ideals. That’s why 60-80% of the country depending on whose poll you believe wants to change it.
3 krove // Jun 25, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Read my lips>>>>>>>>>> Healthcare is ALREADY rationed!!!
There ate 50 million plus without any healthcare whatever. That’s total rationing. Then there are people paying half their salary in premiums. That’s more rationing of other areas where the money could better go.
Then there are the people booted out of their health care because they become sick. That really is rationing.
I am guessing that Clay is a Pharma or Insurance company lobbyist. He has all the lobbyist answers to give and no solutions at all.
4 lward99 // Jun 25, 2009 at 1:19 pm
You can Opt Out Too – http://patientoptout.com
“I, the undersigned citizen of the United States, demand that the U.S. Congress keep the government out of my healthcare decisions. Furthermore, if government-mandated healthcare should be enacted in any form by Congress and signed into law by President Obama, I insist that I be excluded from any government-run or mandated healthcare program and exempt from any and all taxes, fees and mandates imposed to pay for it.”
5 balconesfault // Jun 25, 2009 at 2:10 pm
“I insist that I be excluded from any government-run or mandated healthcare program and exempt from any and all taxes, fees and mandates imposed to pay for it.”
LOL – good luck with that.
Can I “opt out” of any of my taxes going to pay for construction projects in Iraq or Afghanistan?
6 krove // Jun 25, 2009 at 4:53 pm
I insist I get a tax refund for George and Dick’s excellent Iraq war adventure.
Not sure what my refund of the trillion or so bucks flushed down the toilet will be but I sure wanted nothing to do with that disaster.
You must log in to post a comment.