Not Quite Dead Yet

The rejection in the Senate Finance Committee, at the hands of moderate Democrats, of two different versions of the so-called "public option" for health insurance would seem to squelch prospects for some variant of that feature being included in a final version. However, the option is included in four of the five bills that have passed various Senate and House committees, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists that the House version will include a public option, and the Obama White House is widely believed to want it.

So we have probably not heard the last of it.

The public option, creating a government-run health insurance entity to compete with private insurance companies, is widely viewed by proponents and opponents alike as a thin wedge designed to lead — eventually — to a single-payer system. That is a system in which only the taxpayers, through the government, pay for health care. Even as European governments with years of experience with such systems are starting to modify theirs in the direction of privatization, the kinds of politicians who see the essence of progressivism as making the U.S. more like the Europe of yesteryear are determined to move toward single-payer health care in this country.

Those who disingenuously deny that a public health insurance option is a stalking-horse for single payer claim that all they want to do is inject a little competition into the system, to "keep the private insurance companies honest." But none of the proposals put forward so far envisions anything like competition on an even playing field.

Not only would the government insurance entity not have to make a profit (which in a competitive market generally leads to lower prices rather than higher), it would be financed with taxes rather than paying taxes.

In addition to these implicit subsidies, you can bet that Congress would continue to lavish subsidies on it so that while in reality being more expensive than private insurance, it would appear to the consumer to be less expensive.

In addition, every bill put forward so far not only includes mandatory enrollment, but also is loaded with coverage mandates that can only raise costs and reduce competition. Consumers won't have the option of buying a Chevy insurance package; it's a Cadillac for everyone — in itself a step toward a one-size-fits all approach to health care in this large and diverse country.

Most pundits now say that President Obama will have to make the call as to whether a public option is included in whatever bill is finally cobbled together for a final vote. There are rumors that his disengagement at the level of legislative nuts and bolts has already ended. The White House is said to be preparing a backup bill to be presented if the legislative process becomes hopelessly stalled.

If that's how things shake out the result is likely to be modest reforms — just enough for Mr. Obama to be able to say he achieved something — rather than a giant step toward government control. We would prefer reforms pointed toward more individual choice and consumer control, but that's unlikely in the Congress as currently constituted.

More government control of the Internet isn't neutral. It's the nose under the tent everyone will come to regret, save perhaps those politically connected interests who manage to "game" the system.

REPRINTED FROM THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM