“Public option” should have been “bargain” insurance plan
Republicans have long been better at nomenclature than Democrats. They would never have been so stupid as to launch a campaign for a policy with the vague and bureaucratic-sounding name, “public option.” Much of the general public doesn’t seem to know what it means.
That may explain one of the major findings from a new Washington Post/ABC News health care poll, which finds public support for Obama’s reform plans grow if a public option is dropped.
But it is the public option that has become the major point of contention, with support for the government creation of an insurance plan that would compete with private insurers stabilizing in the survey after dipping last month. Now, 55 percent say they like the idea, but the notion continues to attract intense objection: If that single provision were removed, opposition to the overall package drops by six percentage points, according to the poll.
But why? What’s the big deal about a government-run health insurance program that would require consumers to pay premiums (just like in private insurance)? Perhaps the opposition has mounted — though it is notable that 55 percent of poll respondents still say that like the idea — because Republicans have spent the last few months insisting that the public option would drive private insurers out of business. The widely-respected Congressional Budget Office estimates that no more than 10 or 11 million people would be enrolled in any public option by the year 2013. That’s a sliver of the population in a nation of 300 million or so. That’s not enough to drive any private insurer out of business.
Perhaps Democrats were relying on the public to understand “option” is from the same root word as “optional.” You can take it or leave it. The Dems should have known better.
In our sound bite culture, they should have called the “public option” the low-premium” insurance plan or the “budget insurance” plan. They lost the battle for want a better name.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
22 comments Add your comment
joe matarotz
September 14th, 2009
12:16 pm
It’s those rascals, the Republicants, up to their old tricks.
I Report/ Vast White Wing Conspirator (-: You Whine )-:
September 14th, 2009
12:23 pm
Spoken like a true brainwashing socialist.
Meanwhile, back in the Free World, we know what the Post Office is.
And Amtrak.
And Medicare fraud.
Um, we’ve had enough, thanks anyway!
Joey
September 14th, 2009
12:26 pm
A few years ago I had an email exchange with former AJC Op-Ed Columnist Mike King. He wrote that he would drop his AJC (Aetna) health care insurance in a heartbeat in favor of National Health Care.
It makes me wonder if your position, Cynthia, as well as other AJC staffers’ positions, is colored by your poor insurance plan?
Further, given that the AJC coverage is so bad, would you drop the AJC plan in favor of National Health Coverage?
John Williams
September 14th, 2009
12:53 pm
The public option is a plan for the government to run private insurance companies out of business. The President says that the public option will provide competition for the private insurance companies. The competition that it provides is not on the level playing field. If a private insurance company operates at a deficit for long enough it will eventually go out of business. If the public option operates at a deficit, the government can use force to extract more taxes from taxpayers to make up the difference.
Patrick
September 14th, 2009
1:09 pm
The only people who comment on editorials are people that are incapable of forming their own opinions. This person’s entire job is to be “controversial” so you people will read her column and argue and fight. This so called “journalist” doesn’t care if you agree or disagree. She only cares that you read her column so she can keep her job. You people are really a very sad group.
pat
September 14th, 2009
1:11 pm
Patrick, did you not just comment? Welcome to the “very sad group”.
jconservative
September 14th, 2009
1:23 pm
The public is not opposed to a public option “in principle”. Focus groups have indicated this for 20 years & still do so. Cynthia you are
over simplifying the problem.
The public sat by & watched Bush 43 double the deficit & did not raise a peep. Now they are up in arms, & rightly so. It is everything coming to a head in the past year. It started in Oct 2008 with the bailing out of Wall Street – and Wall Street as always been a “them”.
Billions of taxpayer money to bail out people getting millions in bonuses. The financial crash & the 401K’s becoming 101K’s, & dreams of retirement out the door. The real estate market in total collapse & millions of people upside down on their home mortgages. People now feel that they were lied to on Iraq and a bad idea became a worse plan in the execution. Now Afghanistan has fallen apart & people are thinking maybe we should have stayed out in the first place.
But the doubts about government really go back to Katrina. If anyone ever needed a lesson that government by its very nature is incompetent, Katrina is all the evidence they will ever need. Government was saying one thing & people were seeing the exact opposite on their TVs.
Today people just do not trust government to do anything correctly.
If only they had realized that 50, 30 or even 10 years ago.
Alas Babylon……..
Roger
September 14th, 2009
1:38 pm
I wonder why Cynthia isn’t writing about the latest episodes of Kanye West and Serena Williams. There HAD to be some type of racism involved in their latest foolish behavior.
Bob
September 14th, 2009
1:42 pm
If you read HR 3200, you will soon learn there is nothing “low cost” about the plan. In fact, it is on par with plans offered to federal employees. The plan as designed by the House would automatically double premiums, not lower them.
jt
September 14th, 2009
1:44 pm
“In our sound bite culture, they should have called the “public option” the low-premium” insurance plan or the “budget insurance” plan.”
A lie is a lie.
Paul/Wilson 2012.
El Jefe
September 14th, 2009
1:48 pm
Why would a public option be competition?
Isn’t there enough competition out there all ready?
Oh, I see, Government says we can only use a few of the insurance companies in Georgia, not the 1000+ available.
If the “public Option” was only for those with Welfare id cards – that would be cool. But when it forces businesses to choose between providing healthcare for their employees or paying a small fine to drop them – well, guess what.
By the way, why would the government want to force the unionization of healthcare workers? Why is Union bargained healthcare benefits exempt from this plan?
Just a couple of questions.
El Jefe
September 14th, 2009
1:50 pm
Speaking of what Ms. Tucker should be reporting(an oxymoron) what about the latest ACORN scandal? How about some of the czars?
Oh, wait – that might take some effort on her part.
Jen
September 14th, 2009
1:59 pm
The CDC does a good job. It’s not at all incompetent. Even during bad leadership.
Turd Ferguson
September 14th, 2009
2:01 pm
“The widely-respected Congressional Budget Office.” Widely respected? Thats a gem I tell ya, a Gem!
Public option would eventually run the private insurance industry into bankruptcy and Ms Tucker knows this to be true.
Shawny
September 14th, 2009
2:29 pm
“What’s the big deal about a government-run health insurance program…”
Because it is govt run. Period. It will not run at a surplus. It will be subsidized to stay afloat, and like other govt programs, it will still operate in the red. Except it will unfairly compete with private insurance companies that have to operate in the black to remain in business. comprende?
Thomas Jefferson
September 14th, 2009
2:41 pm
I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
Irving Kristol
September 14th, 2009
2:43 pm
Democracy does not guarantee equality of conditions – it only guarantees equality of opportunity.
El Jefe
September 14th, 2009
2:52 pm
We didn’t like it when Bush “gave” us the Medicare Drug plan. We were angry with the TARP bailouts.We are angry with Obama trying to ram healthcare down our throats. We will stand up again with Cap and Trade. When Obama brings up amnesty for illegal aliens – to give them healthcare no doubt, we will be heard again and again. We need someone in DC to stand up for the rest of us.
Congress and the White House and hell bent to ruin this country with massive spending without any regard for how we will have to pay it back.
Too bad we have to wait until 2012 to get rid of Obama.
Bear Stearns
September 14th, 2009
4:17 pm
I love me some unregulated inequality of conditions. See how well I turned out?
“Public optionâ€� should have been “bargainâ€� insurance plan … | Insurance Expert
September 14th, 2009
5:18 pm
[...] the original post here: “Public optionâ€� should have been “bargainâ€� insurance plan … AKPC_IDS += "9892,";Popularity: unranked [?] Share and [...]
Yet another opinionhole
September 15th, 2009
2:07 am
“Congress and the White House and hell bent to ruin this country with massive spending without any regard for how we will have to pay it back.
Too bad we have to wait until 2012 to get rid of Obama.”
Yeeeeah…. Because Bush didnt put us in debt right? it was Clinton and his long term plan to destroy the country… but hes sooooo clever that he made it look like he created a surplus? Or were your eyes on his cigar?
Obama hasnt even done anything yet… you assume too much. Take your time…. you have to wait 4 years… save your breath until hes made a mistake. Or grab your gun and put yet another mustache on the man.
Oh and im sure socialist comments are around the corner…. Unions were called communist ideals, and people were beaten to death in the streets in the great depression, and yet, those big businesses didnt fall when unions were formed. Propaganda… isnt that more nazi germany than somthing similar to most of what the other UN countries already have anyway? they arent on fire as of yet… are they?
oh well, why bother arguing…. 55-45… you lose.
demwit
September 15th, 2009
2:10 pm
No way this pig was going to fly…, regardless of lipstick color.