A Botched Debate

Pity the poor Democrats. Now that they control both houses of Congress, they can't very well blame Republicans for messing up the health care debate. That's their doing. And mess it up they have.

Part of the reason is basic politics. President Barack Obama can't reach out to conservative Democrats who oppose a public insurance option without alienating liberal Democrats who support one. Both sides have dug in their heels. And now it seems highly unlikely that the House version of health care reform and the Senate version can be blended together without a series of compromises that will render the final product worthless.

Part of the reason is simple economics. Despite the obligatory assurances of the White House and Democratic leaders in Congress, this is a plan that could never have been paid for without printing more money and ballooning the deficit. Worse, our national health care system would be destroyed as costs rise, the medical profession withers, private insurance companies go out of business, and millions of Americans who are perfectly happy with the health care coverage they have now find themselves unceremoniously pushed into a public option by their employers.

Yet, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tried to finesse the issue of the public option by coming up with the optional option, giving states the opportunity to "opt-out" of a public-financed insurance plan, he only raised more questions — and not just from the right.

If Democrats really do believe that their formula for affordable health care is a civil right, then how can they allow states to opt out of providing it?

Still, perhaps one of the best criticisms of the public option we've heard recently came from someone who has emerged as a key player in the debate: Sen. Joe Lieberman. The Connecticut independent recently voted with the Democratic majority to open debate on the Senate health care bill, but he has also stated his opposition to a public option. If that stays in, Lieberman promises, he'll join a Republican filibuster.

As the senator said recently on NBC's "Meet the Press," this is exactly the wrong time for this kind of radical revamp. "We have a health care system that has real troubles," Lieberman said, "but we have an economic system that is in real crisis. And I don't want to fix the problems in our health care system in a way that creates more of an economic crisis."

While we disagree that any of the proposals at hand will fix existing problems as much as create new ones, we take Lieberman's larger point. In these difficult economic times, there is a natural tendency among many Americans to want government to act as an all-encompassing safety net to care for them and their families. We simply can't afford to do that. Even if we could, we'd be doing the recipients of this largesse more harm than good.

In the end, chances are good that the experiment will fail. But experts say "Obamacare" would be difficult to reverse. Let's hope we never have to find out.

REPRINTED FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM