RedState Is Wrong on Health Care Co-ops
August 20, 2009 by Cato
Filed under Healthcare, National, National Politics
I hate to disagree with Erick Erickson over at RedState. He’s usually right, and has been kind enough to link to several posts of mine in the past (which is far better than receiving a gold star from the teacher in first grade). Unfortunately, Erick’s attack on the Heritage Foundation and his stance against health care co-ops simply doesn’t fly.
What Heritage is claiming about co-ops is right on. Co-ops (true, regional co-ops, not a “public option” given a more politically safe name) could be a viable solution (but certainly not a silver bullet) in reforming our health care system. And make no mistake; we do need reform.
Some of the solutions conservatives have put forward regarding health care reform include:
- Tort Reform
- Insurance Portability Across State Lines
- An end to individual state mandates regarding health insurance
- Allow the purchasing of health insurance policies across state lines
- Allow small businesses to form purchasing groups
- An expansion of Health Savings Accounts
- ……
Co-ops can be part of the solution in portability and buying across state lines. Already, multi-state employers are allowed to provide insurance to employees from outside the state of issuance. Why not individuals?
There is nothing inherently wrong with co-ops. Sure, they’ve got a bit of that granola eating, kumbaya, commie-lefty aura about them, but in practice they are simply a group of individuals, families, or businesses coming together and pooling their resources for a common benefit.
Agricultural co-ops have been around for a long time. Every time you purchase a pound of Land ‘O Lakes butter or a bottle of Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice Cocktail you are buying from a co-op. While Ace Hardware stores are individually owned, the Ace Hardware brand and national / regional marketing is handled by a co-op. If you live in a rural area, chances are that your electrical power is supplied by a co-op.
There are already health care co-operatives in existence in the US. Group Health, in Washington state, and Health Partners, in Minnesota, are just two examples. If you think about it, there is not a huge difference between a health insurance co-op and a mutual insurance company.
Admittedly, I don’t think that the Democrats are talking about a true co-op. A Democrat health care bill that includes co-ops probably will just be a re-packaging of government run health care. Erickson admits as much:
The Democrat proposal is nothing like what Heritage suggested, just with bits and pieces from Heritage’s proposal thrown in so people like Enzi have something to vote for. But as we’ve already noted at RedState, the co-op proposal right now will not foster competition, it will just insert the government referee into the health insurance business in competition with private insurers. And private business cannot compete with a business run on taxpayer dollars that also gets the set the rules for everyone else to follow.
Then I ask, how is this Heritage’s burden to bear? If Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) votes for a more semantically palatable version of ObamaCare, shame on him. Fortunately, I have more faith in Enzi. Ditto for Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA).
Heritage is a think tank, not a political consultancy. It is not their job to weigh every proposal against how liberals might attempt to re-package its rhetoric in order to lead us to their socialist utopia. If that were the case, the Reagan administration would have been a bust.
They also note that their definition of co-ops IS NOT ObamaCare with a name change:
If by health care “co-op,” Congress means allowing private associations to collectively buy health insurance for their members or operate a health insurance exchange, or allowing people to buy health insurance from a non-profit, member-owned private insurer, then those would be positive, pro-consumer developments.
However, simply slapping the word “cooperative” onto a new “insurer,” but then specifying that the government — not the policyholders — picks the board of directors (as Sen. Schumer wants), or that taxpayers will subsidize it, or that it has to pay doctors and hospitals at Medicare rates, would just be an exercise in trying to disguise a “public plan.”
Again, co-ops are not a silver bullet. However, they can be one solution to a very complicated problem.
Sphere: Related Content
We must disagree. Heh.
To be clear, I’m not dismissing cooperatives and am a fan of cooperatives. I worked for a year for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, the parent for the private energy cooperatives around the country.
Perhaps I didn’t state my point well, but it was not against cooperatives per se, but against the Heritage Foundation’s aggressive push at this moment in favor of cooperatives. Their roll out, coinciding with the Democrats’ roll out of cooperatives, is confusing a few dim witted members of Congress and providing several sneaky members of Congress with cover to support the public option through the back door of cooperatives.
Now we’re left with Democrats saying what they are proposing are cooperatives and Heritage saying they are not real cooperatives. The result? Muddy water, confusion, and cover.
It was a bad political move by Heritage. They say they are a policy shop, but they routinely engage in the political conversation and should have known better than to start their push right as the Democrats were left floundering without any ideas.
Hope that clarifies things.
I will also add that I think cooperatives are relatively untested at the level and operational capacity that Heritage is proposing, but I am amenable to them. They’ll just never, ever happen with the Democrats in charge, thus back to my original point that Heritage bringing them up just gives cover and adds confusion.
I thought that our main disagreement was in whether Heritage should enter the debate; and you’ve confirmed that. As I said, Heritage is a policy shop. My view is that for them to do their best work they shouldn’t be worrying about the political implications. We’ll just have to disagree on that one.
BTW – Great job this past weekend at RightOnline. Was able to watch on C-SPAN. I wanted to attend but was getting my middle son ready to start his first year at Hampden-Sydney. Hope to catch it next year.