My spouse and I are watching the local news at 6 a.m. this morning, just like every weekday morning, laptops open. Mine to political sites, his to fishing reports. Hubby gets his daily shot of news from the teevee, no more than an hour a day. On comes a story about tonight's speech, and how health care reform hangs in the balance. "Sure," he snorts. "As if anyone can argue that no reform is better than any reform at all."
"Actually, that's an argument I'd make, given most of what's on the table now," I say. And then I proceed to share the details of the plans.
There's the Baucus plan and all the others that are incrementally a bit better. But mostly what I share is that subsidies pretty much end for any family earning between $60,000 and $80,000 a year. Middle class families without insurance will likely be required to buy private insurance plans which will cost between $12,000 - $18,000 a year in premiums, and this doesn't include out-of-pocket expenses like deductibles which can add anywhere from $3000 to $20,000 or more a year, depending on co-pays and if you stay healthy.
Hubby is shocked - we pay $200 a month for our family coverage, since his employer (the federal government) pays over $1000 a month. "Why is it so much more expensive than what we pay?" he asks. I respond: "We're in a large pool. Even the poor who are 'subsidized' under these proposed plans, trying to raise a family on $30,000 - $40,000 a year, will likely be required by law to pay $300 or more a month for private insurance, which will cover next to nothing. And if you don't pony up, you pay a penalty of up to $3800 a year."
I watch him actually become pale, as the reality of what is proposed sinks in. I explain, "That's why a public option is so important, but even then, in the best of all worlds, it doesn't kick in for a few years after the mandates. I don't see how a mandate requiring people to buy a shoddy product from profitable corporations that have near monopolies survives a legal challenge."
He is quiet - it's hard for him to comprehend that this is the reform we are supposed to fight for. He finally responds, "This is much worse than the bank bailouts [which he, like a majority of the public, is still furious about]. The government is planning to funnel money directly from the middle class to corporations, not even collecting it as taxes first? Why didn't they just offer Medicare for all?" he asks.
My husband and I are pragmatic people, and we have a daughter with a serious pre-existing heart condition. We put our heart, soul, and wallets into getting Obama elected for many good reasons - ending the war, ending torture, but especially, health care reform.
I think my husband is typical of the Democratic base - skims a newspaper or listens to the news for less than an hour a day. As the numbers come out under any of these plans, don't underestimate the fury that will rise from the base. It's one thing to combat outright lies like pulling the plug on granny. It's another to face the truth - that there were simpler, more popular options available (like expanding Medicare to cover more boomers) that were rejected by a majority of Democratic congresspeople as they designed these plans. Why? To salvage the profits of insurance companies. What other explanation is there? The numbers are a hard truth very few people even in the Democratic base have faced yet.
Last weekend my sister visited on the way to drop her son off at college. She is a professor, another busy person not too wired into the news, but a solid Democrat. I asked her what she thought of the health reform plans. "I think they should scrap them and start over," she replied. I hadn't looked at the details yet, what the plans might mean for working and middle class people. Now I know.
The best case scenario at this point isn't anything near Medicare for all, or even an incremental Medicare phase-in for people aged 55+ or 50+. And that is why the political calculation that the base will support any of these plans is so incredibly misguided.
I think at best the base supports any of these plans for a few days after the speech until the details come out. Once the details come out and everyone runs the numbers, the response from the base will be deep anger and a sense of betrayal. My spouse and sister are a good test case. Why don't you run some numbers by your loved ones who lack details, and see how they respond?
It's easy to get swept up in the fight for a public option, no matter how late it kicks in or weak it is (and believe me, I've made many phone calls and written letters to my representatives in the past few months). But let's not lose the forest for the trees. Are any of these plans worth fighting for at all? It's an honest question from me, not rhetorical.