Health care reform is a complicated issue, but one that’s especially important to women. No matter where you stand, remember that women have a lot at stake in what happens. Women are generally the gatekeepers for maintaining the health of their families, and, as this post points out, women are more likely than men to postpone or forego medical care because of costs.
The most contentious part of Obama’s health proposal is the so-called public option. This would be a government-run, non-profit plan open to people who are not able, or willing, to buy other health insurance. Proponents say that this option would be economical because the government could negotiate better deals on the cost of drugs, hospital stays, etc., than private insurance companies.
Here's the pro:
Opponents say the public option would create one more unmanageable government bureaucracy.
Here's the con:
Other opponents feel that a public option represents unfair competition to private insurance companies.
Is this true? A new study from the pro-reform group Health Care for America Now, using data from the American Medical Association, says that 94 percent of health insurance markets are "highly concentrated," which means there is little competition in these places.
So does opposition to the public option mean that insurance companies don't want any competition, government or otherwise?
A middle ground is the possibility of promoting health co-ops, consumer-owned and -run, like Puget Sound Group Health. Here's an explanation.
But do we really need a change? Maybe not, says this column in the National Review.
And this New Yorker article argues that the most serious problem is not insurance but that doctors can only make money if they call for a lot of unnecessary testing.
