The Medical Freedom Channel

“During the 2008 presidential campaign, both major-party candidates have proposed health plans intended to alter the way the federal government deals with health insurance. Given rising medical care spending and insurance premiums, and the fact that one in six Americans lacks public or private health insurance, it is no wonder that this has emerged as an issue. It is also no wonder that each candidate’s plan tries to cast its scheme as much superior in all aspects to that of his opponent. In this paper I begin with the premise that neither ideal focus nor good implementation are likely to reside in one place. I try to specify some features of both plans that are promising and would work better together than separately. However, I do not take the overly simplified view that you can put together a plan with some aspects from Column A and others from Column B, as if complementarity or mutual incompatibility did not exist — they do. And some ideas in each plan have little merit no matter what. I also do not imagine that everyone will agree that all elements of a compromise will be best from their perspective; there will be a strong temptation to rehash the old arguments in favor of what one likes and proclaim oneself unconvinced about alternatives — to revert to the partisanship that has so far prevented action. And there will still be some trade-offs that depend on value judgments. However, I close with the outline of a program that embodies what I regard as an appropriate give and take.” (09/16/08)