Health Care for America

Health care is likely to dominate policy discussions over the next four years, especially if a Democrat is elected president and Democrats control Congress. Both Clinton and Obama have offered proposals for a national health care plan that would cover virtually all Americans. Their plans are based on a paper by Jacob S. Hacker, a political scientist at Yale, titled, "Health Care for America."  This month the Economic Policy Institute released the results of a study by the health economics team at the Lewin Group. The study suggests that the plan is not only feasible, but that the marginal cost of insuring all Americans is negligible in the context of the US budget.

The Republicans and the healthcare industry lobby vehemently oppose such a plan. Opponents characterize these proposals as "socialized medicine" and point to the alleged failure of such plans in other countries, notably Canada, even though the Canadian experience compares very favorably with the US private healthcare system (See Part I and Part II of "Mythbusting Canadian Healthcare," by Sara Robinson, an American living in Canada and covered by their healthcare system.)

At this point in our history opposition to a universal healthcare plan is not only inhumane, it is economically indefensible. Healthcare takes up a larger share of our GDP and costs are growing faster than in any other developed economy.  All the evidence (infant mortality--the US is 33rd--below Cuba; life expectancy--the US is 45th--below Jordan)  suggests that our healthcare system is far from the best in the world.

How do compassionate conservatives sleep at night?