Right-leaning bloggers are going to their ideological roots today to express their views on health policy and Democratic health overhaul proposals.
Heritage’s Conn Carroll says the best policy approach to address problems in the health care system is consumer driven health care, and lists “six key principles of reform that will bring sanity to our nation’s health care system,” which include individuals buying their own health insurance and “transparent” pricing.
Ed Morrissey looks at a new study on retail clinics in Minnesota and says private sector health services work. He concludes, “If we want to reform care, bend the cost curve downward, and promote supply in the health-care industry, we need to learn the lesson from retail health clinics. The top-down reform proposed by Congress threatens to stop real reform and amplify everything that’s currently wrong with the system.”
A long interview in The National Review with Cato’s Michael Cannon brings out the libertarian perspective on policy. A key statment: “Again, when government compels people to purchase health insurance and dictates what they purchase, costs will climb and quality will stagnate. Free markets will not provide universal health-insurance coverage. And that’s okay, because free markets will reduce unmet need by making medical care more affordable — which also makes it easier to meet what need remains.”
Meanwhile, liberal bloggers are focused what President Obama might say in his “major” address to Congress next week.
The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein did some digging and reports that there are two groups vying for the upperhand: “The administration is going to put a plan down on paper. The question is what it will say. Conversations with a number of White House officials make it clear that, at this point, even they don’t know. The argument was raging as recently as last night, and appears to have hardened into two main camps. Both camps agree that the cost of the bill has to come down. The question is how much, and what can be sacrificed.”
The buzz is that the cost will come down to $700 billion over 10 years, instead of $1 trillion. The New Republic’s Jonathan Cohn mulls over the implications of lowering a bill. He writes, “Predictably, the compromises a $700 billion bill require are a lot more severe than the compromises in a $1 trillion bill.”
Lastly, the newest edition of Health Wonk Review is up at the Ludicus Project.
It’s chock full of links to articles and reports and ends with a referral to Mad Kane’s limerick:
Dear Obama, the GOP’s clear:
Won’t support any health reform. Hear?
You can whittle the bill
Down to bupkis — you still
Won’t get votes. Yes they’ve duped you, I fear.
Your naivety’s hurting our cause.
And so how about taking a pause?
Work with Dems on the Hill
To create a fresh bill
That has nary a GOP clause.
