National Healthcare: Problem, Solution

Here’s what I’d like to see from the Democratic candidates:

The first priority is this: No American should ever face losing a lifetime of savings due to a health catastrophe. Every American who gets health insurance through a job faces that possibility someday. No American company should stop hiring or decide it has to use temps because healthcare costs are so unpredictable. No American company should be at an unfair competitive disadvantage against companies whose countries pick up healthcare costs.

When I take office, I will begin work immediately to create what I am proposing to call the Federal Major Medical Insurance Corporation. It will cover every American not on Medicare for all healthcare costs above X. That’s Federal umbrella health insurance. For all costs above X, it is absolutely universal, absolutely portable, and absolutely cannot be denied due to a pre-existing condition.

Below X, insurance companies can compete to fill in the gap. We may be able to convert some existing programs to help all Americans buy the gap insurance. We will probably have to set some ground rules for that. Of course, the biggest hurdle is that we will have to decide what X can be, considering all the damage the Bush administration has done to the Federal budget. We may have to make a modest start with a high deductible for X. But we need to first get the structure in place, so at some point the cash register stops ringing on a family facing major illness. Over time, too, we may be able to make X more and more reasonable for everyone.

This is true insurance. We all face the possibility of a devastating healthcare event. Who it will hit and how much it will cost is completely unpredictable. Even if you believe strongly in limited government, it makes perfect sense for all the American people to get together and promise each other that we will never allow a health problem turn into a complete financial disaster. We all did that when we promised each other that not having work in old age will not mean poverty. That was Social Security, and it works (and will continue to work in the future). Because it makes perfect sense, that’s why we can do this.

We have many other things to do in the healthcare arena. But eliminating the fear of personal or family financial disaster is the first one, the biggest one, the one that frees us from the current mess that is poisoning our society and our economy. We must do it.

Too often, Democratic candidates tells us what the solution is without first clearly identifying the problem the voters are experiencing – just assuming the voters know the problem and will see that it fits the plan (and vice versa). “We want health insurance because, well, because we’re Democrats who always want health insurance. Here’s my plan. It might sound complicated, but trust me, it’s a good plan.” Voters want to know you understand the problem – really understand the problem. Just getting that far is huge. Other voters, smug in their current jobs with good benefits, may need a little push to see there is a problem that could affect them. This approach is problem (possible financial disaster, companies reluctant to hire full-time employees), solution (Federal Major Medical Insurance Corporation).

I like to say, Keep It Simple, Stupid. Problem, solution. 10 minutes. If I am a voter, I totally get this. If I don’t know the problem personally, I certainly see the problem. I see why it depresses jobs, too. I see why people stay in jobs they hate for fear of losing the benefits. Federal insurance above X may not be perfect, but it’s a huge, huge improvement. It’s for everybody, forever until Medicare. I also see the votes pouring in so fast that radical right wing Republicanism is destroyed for a generation, as it needs to be. I see the remaining Republicans extremely reluctant to oppose this obvious benefit to the American people, to shout "socialism" or take the side of the corporate opponents. I see major corporations who are not insurance companies or pharmaceutical companies jumping on board for the huge cost relief, even if reluctantly for undermining their Business Roundtable buddies from those industries. I see insurance companies giving weak opposition because they can quickly figure out how to operate profitably under this system. I see pharmaceutical companies caving because they always make money hand over fist, no matter what. I see moderate libertarian Republicans grudgingly admit that this might be a legitimate function of government.

Will somebody please tell me what’s fundamentally wrong with this picture?