ADD MEANS-TESTING FOR THE RETIRED AND ENTITLEMENT REFORM KILLS THE WELFARE STATE:

A New Consensus on Universal Health Care (Steven Pearlstein, January 17, 2007, Washington Post)

[A] consensus...has been taking shape in Washington over the past two years, in behind-the-scenes negotiations among health insurers, hospitals, physicians, business and labor groups, drug companies and consumer groups such as Families USA. The first draft of their effort will be unveiled tomorrow. And while the "consensus" will fudge some of the most difficult issues in an effort to keep the coalition together, the outlines of a genuinely comprehensive reform plan are coming into focus.

What does that consensus look like?

It starts with universal coverage, accomplished either through a mandate on everyone to purchase basic health insurance or a mandate on all employers to offer it.

It includes subsidies for families with incomes up to 300 percent of the poverty level to help defray the cost of that insurance and the deductibles and co-payments that go with it.

It involves changes in tax law so that individuals who purchase health insurance enjoy the same tax benefits as those who get it as a fringe benefit at work.

It sets up a pooling arrangement in every state to allow individuals and small businesses to buy health insurance at the same price as large corporations.

Finally, it sets a deadline for physicians and hospitals to switch to computerized health records, along with a program to provide no-interest loans to buy the necessary hardware and software. [...]

Conservatives and their small-business allies would have to swallow some form of "pay or play" -- either providing employer-paid health insurance or paying a tax to the state subsidy pool.

And liberals would have to accept a "basic" insurance package that provides full coverage for preventive care and catastrophic illness but requires patient cost-sharing for routine care.

These concessions won't come easy, which is why there has been no significant progress on health-care reform in the decade since the Clinton debacle. But the current system has become such a problem for so many providers and consumers that many are now willing to compromise on long-held positions.

If they can cut a deal before Democrats figure out that we'll all be lining our pockets with what's left over after the out-of-pocket the GOP should leap.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 17, 2007 7:22 PM