In “The Perils of the Public Plan,” Paul Starr warns that a public-insurance option could turn into exactly the opposite of what progressives want. Here he discusses the problems with the Prospect‘s two other co-founders, Robert Kuttner and Robert Reich.
Paul Starr:
According to last week’s Washington Post, the public option is the “crux” of the health-reform debate and the “greatest challenge” for Senate negotiators to overcome. That’s an accurate description of the current political scene, but it’s true only because so many people, including members of Congress, are responding ideologically to the ideaof government involvement.
The public option is not the biggest question in reform. Under the proposals being considered, it would be offered only within insurance exchanges at the state and regional level. The far bigger question is how those exchanges work:
For the rest of the debate click on:
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=debating_the_public_option
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1333c2a9-1bfc-468d-aa24-cb9e6adeff47)
Thanks! Just expanding Medicare to all the uninsured might be the best option. I know the program is not perfect but it’s a whole lot better than what the insurance companies and the corrupt congresspeople are doing to us. At least we would have more control with Medicare than the other alternatives.