On the Public Option

MISSION:  The Coalition to Protect Patients’ Rights recognizes that individual choice will be threatened by the introduction of a public option plan. So we will expose the failure of government-controlled healthcare coverage, especially noting decreases in quality and increases in spending and government inefficiency.

Much of the controversy surrounding health reform centers on the “public option” which is being presented as a government-backed insurance plan that will offer competition to private insurance and an additional choice for all Americans.  However, as former HHS Secretary Leavitt recently pointed out, “the language of competition and choice cleverly conceals the objective.  The President’s public option is a gateway leading to 118 million Americans losing the option of private choice.”
 
This public option would “compete” directly against private health plans in a national health insurance exchange.  However, the competition wouldn’t be a fair one.  The government would subsidize the cost of healthcare by increasing taxes by trillions of dollars or – as it is doing with Medicare – run the program at a deficit – which will leave a tremendous financial burden on our children and grandchildren.  In addition, if the public plan is opened to all employees at Medicare payment levels it is estimated that 119.1 million people would be moved from private insurance to a government plan.

But, the public option would provide fewer services and products as compared with current employer-based insurance and also result in less innovation and discovery, as government cost-containment measures would reduce incentives for research and development.
 
How would this happen?

First, a public option system would create an environment where the government would compete in the marketplace and regulate that same marketplace, all while having taxpayers pay for it. By devising its own coverage plan, writing the laws that govern healthcare, and supplied with a virtually endless stream of revenue from taxes, the government-controlled public option would quickly begin to crowd out private industry options.

Over a period of time, more and more Americans would be forced into the artificially cheap public plan driving private plans from the market, unable to compete.  As a result, the public option would be the only option and Americans would be left with no choice at all.  Naturally, this government-controlled healthcare monopoly would lead to higher costs and poorer quality of care.

In addition, current legislative proposals would pay for the public option through a combination of massive tax increases and drastic cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Any health reform approach that offers a new entitlement by taking funds from another is both irresponsible and dangerous.  During the presidential campaign then-candidate Obama said that drastic cuts to Medicare would result in “fewer places to get care and less freedom to choose your own doctor.”  He went on to tell a crowd of seniors that drastic cuts to Medicare would mean higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription medicines, fewer services and lower quality care. Now, however, President Obama is proposing to cut Medicare to pay for his healthcare proposals.

The Coalition to Protect Patients’ Rights will vigorously oppose using funds from entitlement programs already facing looming shortfalls to pay for a new public option.