- Edwards Releases Senate Fundraising Totals
- Academics Say Higher Education Prepared Them for Higher Office
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: The Mountain Region
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: New England
- Top Races in 2016: The Midwest
Instead of waging nonstop war over Obamacare, Republicans and Democrats should fix it — and a Democratic governor has ideas about how to do it.
Phil Bredesen, a former health care executive who’s finishing eight years as governor of Tennessee, saved his state from Medicaid-induced bankruptcy and emerged as a critic of the health care reform bill that his party and president pushed through Congress this year.
He’s written a book, “Fresh Medicine: How to Fix Reform and Build a Sustainable Health Care System,” that could form the basis of a bipartisan rewrite of Obamacare.
As matters now stand, Republicans plan to try to repeal the 2010 health reform law, which President Barack Obama will veto.
Then, the GOP will try to defund or otherwise block aspects of its implementation, creating more of the uncertainty that Republicans say the plan has caused for struggling businesses.
And the battle is likely to go on into and through the 2012 elections — possibly with no resolution even then.
Bredesen’s plan has aspects that should appeal to both parties. For Democrats, it’s universal and comprehensive, guaranteeing basic health care for everyone, financed through a trust fund akin to Social Security.
For Republicans, it includes vouchers, offers free choice of health care plans, replaces Medicare and Medicaid, and limits medical malpractice awards.
And, for both parties (and the country), it saves lots and lots of money — $4 trillion in the year that the plan is fully in place and $25 trillion over a 15-year implementation period, assuming health care spending is reduced from the present 17 percent of gross domestic product and capped at 14 percent.
There are controversial elements to it, for sure — a legislated ceiling on how much the plan can cost and a steeply progressive set of taxes to pay for it, including a 20 percent payroll tax up to $500,000 of income and a 10 percent income tax surcharge.
Moreover, the government would have to borrow $6 trillion to $7 trillion over 15 years to provide seed capital for the trust fund.
But Bredesen contends that, for average Americans, the taxes would cost less than they pay in lost wages for health insurance.
The borrowed money would be paid back — and the system would keep the country from going broke paying for health care.
As matters stand now, health care is projected to consume 25 percent of the national economy sometime in the 2020s — and, Bredesen told me, at best the new health care law “will bend the curve only slightly one way or another.”
He doubts it will do so. “Making it possible for tens of millions of people to have health insurance ... is a very good thing, but doing it by adding them to an already unsustainable system just kicks the can down the road a bit farther.”
Bredesen agrees with many Republicans that “the fundamental problem with our health care system is that we have systematically removed the tension between buyer and seller that makes economics work.” That is, it’s not a true market system.
Patients with insurance have no idea what any procedure costs. Providers can jack up fees to the limit of an insurer’s willingness to pay. And insurers fundamentally are just intermediaries, passing costs on to employers.