Uwe Reinhardt of Princeton wrote in the Economix blog in the NY Times:
As a long-time champion of universal health insurance for this country — even at the risk of occasionally being labeled a socialist — I was both stunned and charmed by Senator Hutchison’s statement. She was proposing that women should not have to decide between spending $250 of their own money to get a mammogram or go without it, and that the key here is to get someone else — either public or private health insurance — to pay for it.
I cannot recall a clearer statement of unreserved support for universal and comprehensive health insurance for America and a more straightforward definition of rationing health care. (In this connection, see this earlier post.)
via economix.blogs.nytimes.com
Just when Kay Bailey Hutchison thought she was landing points for her side in the health care debate, she unwittingly made the most persuasive case you can possible make for universal health care.
This piece by Uwe Reinhardt in the Economix blog in the NY Times deconstructs some comments made by the distinguished lady from Texas last week on Meet the Press.
Once we we have finally won this battle--and I'm thinking it will be fairly soon--it will be informative to look at comments like Hutchison's and see how foolish the case against universal care really is.
What this short interview segment--and Reinhard'ts analysis of it--goes to show is that the debate over health reform is completely misdirected. It should prove, once and for all, that the opponents of reform have no real case to make. Their endless claptrap about rationing and government takeovers offers no insight, no compelling reasoning, and no purpose--other than to protect the moneyed interests that thrive on the status quo. (That, ultimately, is what it is really all about.)
Hutchison represents a state with an appalling record of extending health care to its population, with 25% of its people lacking health insurance. Yet, Texas is the proud home of some of our most renowned medical institutions--the M.D. Andersen Cancer Center and the Texas Heart Institute for starters.
But those institutions are essentially unavailable to one-quarter of the people Hutchison "represents." Yet, unwittingly, she has made the case for why they, like anyone who walks the planet, is deserving of care.
Comments