Pres.-elect Obama is already mobilizing the masses on health care reform using the array of technology tools he used during the campaign.
The health-care mobilization taking shape before Obama even takes office will include online videos, blogs and e-mail alerts as well as traditional public forums. Already, several thousand people have posted comments on health on the Obama transition Web site.
National Review offers some Essential Reading On The Health Care Debate:
As the debate unfolds in Congress next year, you can expect incessant references to reforms already underway in Massachusetts, Indiana, Florida, and elsewhere. Policymakers will want to ground their proposals in recent state-level experience to reduce public apprehension and political opposition.
Obama, most Democrats, several large insurance and health-care companies, and some Republicans and conservatives will point to the Massachusetts model. It combines a government-managed supermarket for health plans, called a connector, with sliding-scale subsidies based on household income, mandates on businesses and individuals to “play or pay,” and a new state-run health plan for middle-income people to “compete” with private offerings. Their adversaries in the debate — most Republicans and conservatives, plus a few moderate-to-conservative Democrats and some parts of the health-care industry — will point to Indiana, which is using a savings-based plan to reduce the ranks of the uninsured, and Florida, which is trying to introduce consumer choice and incentives into Medicaid.
The NRO article has links to more indepth articles on each approach.
This is from a previous post from about a year ago, but it’s worth repeating here:
I don’t like how liberals have co-opted the term “universal health care”. What they really mean is a government run and government paid socialist utopian health care system. I support health care for everyone — it’s the just thing to do. I just don’t want socialists running it.
Decouple employment from health insurance
Most people get their health insurance from their employer? Why? There are 2 reasons:
1. Employer-provided plans become popular in the 1950’s due to the efforts of industrial-age labor unions.
2. The current tax code perpetuates this status quo by giving employers a tax break not available to individuals for their health insurance.
Let’s level the playing field and see what happens. Let individuals (or private groups of individuals) be treated equally under the tax code as businesses.
Try thinking about this another way. Alcatraz prisoners were told:
“You are entitled to food, clothing, shelter, and medical attention. Anything else you get is a privilege.”
Rule #5, Alcatraz Prison Rules and Regulations - 1934
Do employees get food from their employer?
Generally No, they get money to spend as they please.
Do employees get clothing from their employer?
Generally No, they get money to spend as they please.
Do employees get shelter from their employer?
Generally No, they get money to spend as they please.
So why is it an employer’s responsibility to provide medical coverage? It’s an outdated system that’s only perpetuated by outdated thinking in our tax code. If we leave things the way they are, more people will be without insurance and proper heath care.
What else can we do?
The ideas are too numerous to list here, but check out American SolutionsReal Change, the Center for Health Transformation, and the book Comeback.
Ed. Note: The American Solutions link on the original post no longer works. But since it’s essentially one of Newt’s sites, I added the link to Newt’s book instead (which I’ve read and enjoyed quite a bit).
UPDATE — Heritage has a nice article: Lessons from the States on the Costs of Universal Health Care