Thursday, September 10, 2009

Stepping into the Public Option Debate

Robert Reich just posted a YouTube video giving several reasons why we need a Public Option. I heard several reasons why we need it:

  1. You can keep your existing coverage if you want
  2. Pharmaceutical and insurances companies are against it
  3. It will not add to our national debt
  4. It will compete against current health insurance companies

I still do not see why the Public Option is necessary. If I want to keep my existing coverage, why do I care about the Public Option? Who cares what the pharmaceutical and insurance companies are for or against? Not having this program will not add to our national debt, but who knows for sure if it will not add to it?

I'm more interested with the idea of competing against existing insurance companies. Recently, Rep. Henry Waxman sent letters to the top 52 health insurance companies in the nation to inquire about their business practices. If we already have 52 huge insurance companies and hundreds of smaller ones, why is it so important to add another competitor to the health care arena? If the reason is that this will compete nationally, why don't we just change the insurance rules to allow coverage across state lines?

Bookmark and Share