Demise of the Public Option: Down for the Count, but Not Out?

By Monheit, Alan C. | Inquiry, Winter 2009 | Go to article overview

Demise of the Public Option: Down for the Count, but Not Out?


Monheit, Alan C., Inquiry


I always thought that market competition, for health care and for other goods and services, was a good thing, and I always thought that encouraging meaningful competition in markets dominated by a few large sellers was an especially good thing. In this regard, I found the prospect of using a government health plan--the "public option"--to stimulate competition in highly concentrated health insurance markets to be an appealing feature of health reform proposals. However, as I listened to the debate over whether to include a public option as part of reform, it appears that my thinking has been somewhat cloudy and misguided. As congressional Republicans, pundits on the right, and some conservative Democrats have informed me, adding a new government-run health plan to our existing private health insurance market is possibly the worst thing that we could do to encourage competition, provide access to affordable coverage, and help contain costs. Through their vocal objections and legislative maneuverings to forestall a reasoned debate over the public option, let alone a complete health reform bill, it is clear these critics feel that eliminating the possibility of a public option is well worth the cost of stopping any health reform dead in its tracks.

In my more lucid moments, I seem to recall that these were the same folks who lobbied rather strenuously against earlier efforts by the Obama administration to infuse a government presence in other troubled markets, including the teetering financial sector and faltering automobile industry, and to address the unscrupulous practices by some lenders in the consumer credit and home mortgage markets. Their faith in the self-correcting power of free markets, adherence to classical economic notions of individual and market behavior, and contempt for government efforts to prevent an economic catastrophe have, by some accounts, lent support to the very factors that were responsible for the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression (Akerloff and Schiller 2009). To take a more cynical but frequently documented view, the opposition to the public plan is but one manifestation of efforts by those on the right to see the Obama administration fail by denying the president a signature piece of social legislation.

As I have noted in earlier columns, the general hostility to health reform and, particularly, the unwillingness to entertain the prospect of even a watered-down version of a public health plan, represent reactive responses based on ideology and adherence to political pressures rather than a reasoned assessment of approaches to help insurance markets function in the population's best interest. The tactics and reasoning used to sidetrack a public option reflect a willingness to turn a blind eye to important shortcomings of insurance markets, where competition has been characterized as based on favorable risk selection rather than efforts to reduce costs and enhance health plan quality. This is not to say that all insurers behave in ways that undermine the insurance function. However, practices in the small group and individual insurance markets, and information brought to light by the reform debate, give one pause when assessing the likelihood that the insurance market will function as intended without a significant government presence.

As of this mid-December writing, the prospects for a public option and for reform itself have been mired in efforts to obtain the votes necessary to overcome a Republican filibuster. This threat to stifle debate is a sad commentary both on our legislative process and the willingness by some to sacrifice a basic element of social justice for their own parochial interests. Given the tenor of the debate over the public option, its removal from the Senate's health bill, and the contentious struggle for reform, it is important to consider why the apparent demise of a public health plan option may be short-sighted and may be temporary. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Demise of the Public Option: Down for the Count, but Not Out?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.