Skip to comments.WSJ: 'The false comparison between the costs of public and private medical plans'
Posted on 04/15/2009 10:30:12 AM PDT by FromLori
Ben Sasse, a former Deputy Secretary at HHS during the Bush administration, and Kerry Weems, the former head of Medicare and Medicaid at HHS coauthored this highly informative op-ed today on the hidden costs of public health insurance titled, "Is Government Health Insurance Cheap?" (HT - Mark Hemingway):
Congress is currently away on a two-week recess, but weighty work is occurring in its absence. Staff negotiators are trying to come to agreement on a budget framework for 2010 and beyond. Although this is happening behind closed doors, it appears likely that the budget deal will eventually include a government-run health-insurance option, or "public plan," to compete with private health insurance under the comprehensive health-care reform called for by President Barack Obama. Some lawmakers support or oppose a government-run health-insurance option for purely ideological reasons. Others are open to it because they are pragmatic and -- laudably -- want to be persuaded by data and facts. These moderates have been much influenced by the supposed fact that a public plan such as Medicare is more efficient than commercial insurance. Advocates of the public option routinely ask, "Aren't Medicare's administrative costs a fraction of those of private insurers?"
(Excerpt) Read more at hyscience.com ...
Good article in the WSJ for a change.
Bottom line: our current system is not perfect, but it is better than government health care.
Like the banking system it is over-regulated which is the main cause of pricing problems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.