Let's Opt Out of the Opt Out Debate

All over America, would be politicians are weighing in on Washington's debate over the "Opt Out" clause in Harry Reid's reconciliation of the various Senate Committee health care reform packages. Paula Flowers, who has something on her website about supporting a public option so long as it isn't Government run, is opposed to the opt out calling it a "cop out". Kim McMillan at least opposes opting out, whether or not she opposes the opt out or not I'm not sure, Ward Cammack thinks opting out is a possibility. And so on and so forth.

Fact is, who cares? Really, is this what we are going to consume ourselves with over the next few weeks. Whether we have a watered down "public option" that states could possibly opt out of two years after it is implemented? How about the debate that only a few are talking about, which is why the hell does this health care package ignore over half of the people in this country who don't have a lick of choice in who their health insurance company is because their employers choose for them?

There is a blog called Cooper Uncovered which is part of the group that is supposedly trying to find a candidate to run against Rep. Cooper. They seem to be focused on whether Cooper will vote for the robust "Medicare +5" public option supported by the progressive caucus. He won't. No point in belaboring the issue. He won't. What I want to know is whether or not he will push hard to incorporate aspects of his beloved "Wyden-Bennett" bill that has been largely ignored by the leadership in both houses of Congress? I don't mean saying, "hey, this bill sucks, but look over hear at this lovely bill I sponsored"... I mean doing the behind the scenes work to incorporate aspects of Wyden-Bennett like requiring employers to list the actual cost of our benefits on our pay stub, like perhaps opening up the health exchange markets to those of us who already have insurance, so that maybe we can save some money by moving to a plan more suitable to our needs.

Right now, I have a health insurance plan that I suppose is alright, but have never really enjoyed the benefits of (except the reduced costs associated with people who have insurance). I have a $500 deductible, and considering I'm a relatively healthy young whipper-snapper, I have never met that requirement and so it might as well be a $5000 deductible...personally, if given the option, I'd go with a high-deductible plan and perhaps attach a dental plan to it. But I don't have that option. My employer picks one plan for every member of the company, and that is that.

While I'd be fine with scrapping the employer based health care system altogether (sorry Labor pals), I'd be OK with simply having our company allot a certain amount towards health insurance, with the ability to pick a plan that suits me.

If Democrats did that, I'd wager that Americans would be more supportive of the health care bill, as they would see direct benefits to them. They'd see reforms in action. Instead, we see a multi-hundred billion dollar package that subsidizes private insurance and throws out a token bone of a "public option" that benefits the relatively small number of Americans who will be participating in this health insurance exchange.

Normally I'm fine with supporting legislation that doesn't directly benefit me, as a single white male the Democrats' platform isn't exactly geared towards me, and I'm fine with that. But at the same time its hard to get all hot and bothered about peripheral issues related to health care that don't address the underlying problem which is that we have an employer-based health insurance system that was an unforeseen consequence of wage caps during the Depression and which doesn't make sense from an economics stand point. So, as a constituent of Rep. Cooper, if he were able to open the Democrats' health care plan up to include more Americans like myself, that would be better than some token support for a progressive caucus version of the bill that will never pass the US Senate.