If you believe the theory that a single-payer system of health insurance is the ultimate goal of the Obama Administration and Democrats, then March 27 might prove an important day.
That morning U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy raised the issue during the second of three days of oral arguments over the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It’s right there on page 25 of the 111-page transcript.
Discussing the means by which Congress can force Americans to act through a mandate, tax or penalty, Kennedy said, “Let’s assume that it could use the tax power to raise revenue and to just have a national health service, single payer. How does that factor into our analysis? In one sense, it can be argued that this is what the government is doing; it ought to be honest about the power that it’s using and use the correct power.”
Wow, talk about catnip for those Democrats who have dreamed of a single-payer system, where the government provides all health coverage to Americans. The single-payer advocates haven’t had much to talk about since the single-payer idea fell by the wayside during the debate over health reform during the presidential elections in 2008 and the subsequent presidential and congressional debate in 2009.
Too costly, too much chance of rationing, too much government control, critics argued.
Advocates, if you recall, spoke of how a single-payer system would ensure the biggest risk pool and, by cutting out private insurers, who they vilified as profit-mongers, would save money almost immediately.
The Democrats’ fall-back position, if you buy the argument, is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which is programmed to fail, especially if the individual mandate only is ruled unconstitutional. Insurance executives say it won’t work. Chet Burrell, CEO of CareFirst, a Maryland-based Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliate, said shortly after the law’s passage that the small-group market could “atomize” and that he would consider leaving that market.
Feeding off of Kennedy’s comment and the general negative feedback justices gave to the PPACA during oral arguments on the individual mandate March 27, George Zornick in a commentary in The Nation. picked up the single-payer torch.
“One obvious option, besides just doing nothing and allowing health care costs to continue their exponential growth while more people lose coverage, is a single-payer health insurance plan,” wrote Zornick. “There is no doubt about the constitutionality here—the government is clearly allowed to levy taxes to fund public benefits. Medicare, for example, is not challengeable on the same grounds as Obama’s health care reform.”
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, writing in The Hufffington Post, goes a step further, saying that an expansion of Medicare would be a viable option now, even though it couldn’t gain enough political support in 2009.
Skeptics say it’s all part of the long-range plan, which says that once the PPACA fails to work, then a single-payer system will be the only option. People will clamor for it, especially those whose appetite was whetted for insurance coverage but who cannot afford it privately.
No one can parse the true meaning of what the justices say during oral arguments. That said, the question raised is whether Kennedy, a Ronald Reagan appointee to the court and a possible swing vote on the PPACA’s constitutionality, was signaling to the Obama Administration an approach toward health insurance that might pass the High Court’s muster. Was he feeding the fire of those who want a single-payer system? Or was he referring to the alleged endgame of all Democratic health reform efforts?
Only time will tell, but chances are good that we haven’t heard the last on a single-payer system.
Justice Kennedy, others re-ignite torch for single-payer health care via IFAwebnews.com .
No related posts.