The Hill
May 3, 2011
By Julian Pecquet
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Tuesday that private
healthcare plans ration care for profit but that consumers should be free to
buy whatever coverage they can afford rather than depend on government
rationing.
In remarks to the College of American Pathologists, Cantor warned that
Democrats' healthcare reform law mandates benefits that are too generous and
will bankrupt the country as the government ends up having to offer ever
increasing subsidies. That can only lead to government rationing, he said.
"That doesn't mean those kinds of decisions aren't being made now by the
private sector," Cantor added, "because they are."
Cantor appeared to go further than Republicans have in the past by
acknowledging that not all patients are certain to get optimal healthcare
under a system of private insurance.
"I think that the fundamental nature of our system of third-party payer is
the problem," he said. Patients, he added, too often are left with "no
decision about what they want and what they can afford."
Later, Cantor said Republicans want a safety net for people who can't afford
care but that "we're not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed."
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch...an-governments
Comment: It is somewhat refreshing to hear such a frank discussion of
rationing by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. He does not pretend that
only government programs might lead to rationing, but concedes that the
private sector already makes rationing decisions.
Cantor not only acknowledges that not all patients are certain to get
optimal healthcare under a system of private insurance, but Republicans are
"not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed."
Democrats appear to be in agreement. Under the Affordable Care Act, many
will be left without coverage, and many more of those who have coverage
through private health plans will not be able to afford the out-of-pocket
expenses required for accessing health care, in spite of the subsidies.
These financial barriers to access result in not everyone having the same
outcome guaranteed, but the Democrats remain silent when confronted with
this unacceptable deficiency in their version of health care reform.
There is already enough money in the health care system to ensure that
everyone receives all essential health care services in a timely manner,
with the same high quality outcomes guaranteed for all. The government
rationing that Eric Cantor claims is inevitable occurs only if politicians
are unwilling to budget through a single government program (single payer)
the amount comparable to that we are already spending, publicly and
privately.
Now if only the Democrats would admit that they have made a mistake in
choosing a model of rationing that does not guarantee the same quality
outcome for everyone, then maybe we could have a discussion of a model that
would work. If so, then we could have the frank debate that Eric Cantor has
initiated. Cantor says, "we're not for everyone having the same outcome
guaranteed," but are the Democrats? Let's ask them.