GOPideas... ideas done right

As the health care debate heats up this summer, Republicans have dusted off everyone's favorite arguments: government run anything = bloated, inefficient and incompetent. On the other hand, they have also dusted off the government destroys other players in the marketplace argument, which argues that as soon as a public plan is accepted, we are on a slippery slope towards single payer. This all leaves this Republican scratching his head. If we truly have the best health care in the world and a competently functioning private insurance market --- and government is bloated and incompetent --- why would anyone in the private marketplace fear competition from this bumbling bureaucracy? It can't be both bloated and inefficient, but so ruthlessly competent that it will eliminate the (supposed) superior private marketplace.

This is merely one of the logical conundrums that Republicans arguing against the Obama plan will face as a consequence of policy dormancy. Here are a few others:

• The public does not want government health care. A recent Kaiser poll shows different results: 57% of the public want a public option available instead of just encouraging competition among private firms. 79% want to expand Medicare to allow for people between 55-64 to join, 76% say that Medicare is important for their family and 96% say Medicare is important for the country. The conundrum: if "the people" don't want government health care, then why do overwhelming majorities support government-run Medicare?

• Health care costs are a symptom of hyperactive trial lawyers and not the fault of the free market pharmaceutical industry. If this is the case, then please explain why the pharmaceutical industry has the highest profitability metrics of any industry?

• The health care system is large and complex, therefore, we need to take time to study it before taking significant action. If this is the case, then are Republicans stating that they ignored the problems of growing rolls of uninsured between 2000-2007 and the fact that insurance costs doubled in that timeframe? If ignoring exploding costs combined with declining access in a multi-trillion dollar industry does not reach a level which requires attention by government, then what are the metrics by which Republican politicians judge an issue to be important?

• This entire plan will cost too much and the nation cannot spend so profligately. If spending restraint is so important, then why did Republicans walk in near lockstep to support the largest expansion of a government entitlement in human history?

• The Obama administration is not being honest about the long-term implications and cost of the program. If this is such a huge issue for Republicans, then where is the outrage over the $400 billion prescription drug plan morphing into a $1.2 trillion dollar plan?

• The Obama administration is being dishonest about their plans to morph our health care system into a single payer plan. Obama may be falling short on his goals for transparency in government, but its not like they have directly ordered people to withhold relevant information to obfuscate the truth, thus allowing for 200% cost overruns.

Due to their inaction and intellectual dishonesty, Republicans have lost moral and pragmatic standing on the issue of health care. To go back on offense, the party needs to be honest about the realities of health care needs, the issues involved in maintaining and improving health and the tradeoffs inherent in certain policy choices. Ideas to come.

Comments are welcome, but for the comment to post to the public, you must supply an email address (this is to avoid spam comments). The email address will not be posted publicly and your email address will not be shared, sold or disclosed.