Legal Commentary

Defending The Health Bills: Hey, They Might Work

By Big Tent Democrat

I will probably be a supporter of passing the likely health bills (The Senate bill + a reconciliation fix) deal that will likely emerge from the ongoing House-Senate-White House negotiations. But not because of defenses like this one from Nick Kristof:

The debate about health care in recent months has focused on the shortcomings of the reform proposals. Critics are right to be disappointed [. . .] Critics doubt that the Senate and House bills would succeed in containing health care costs very much, and they may be right. It’s hard to know. But the existing system is a runaway roller coaster. Isn’t it prudent to try brake pedals even if we’re not sure how well they’ll work?

(Emphasis supplied.) Oy. I can do a better job of arguing for the current Senate bill than this. Here's a layup for Kristof - it will cover 31 million uninsured Americans, 15 million through an expansion of Medicaid. 'Maybe it will work' is a ridiculous argument. Why might it work? What does "work" mean?

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on February 18, 2010 (boomark / email).