Reid Celebrates Death Of "Public Option"

Once again, we see that Majority Leader (more like Majority Wimp) Harry Reid is willing to kill of an option for public health insurance just so he can claim he passed health insurance reform. He still doesn't realize that a reform bill without a public option is not real reform. It would be like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound -- it might look good, but you haven't helped the dying patient.

Yesterday, Reid announced that liberals and blue dogs have reached agreement on a compromise regarding the public option. He said, "It goes without saying it's been kind of a long journey. Tonight we've overcome a real problem that we've had." He went on to say that "broad agreement" had been reached which "moves this bill way down the road."

Reid wouldn't provide any details, but other Democrats said the "agreement" means there will be no public option. The public option has been thrown out and private insurance companies will retain their stranglehold on insurance and treatment, and will still be able to sacrifice patients to maximize profits.

The public option will be replaced by a "not-for-profit private option". This private "not-for-profit" insurance will be overseen by the federal Office of Personnel Management, but run by private insurance companies. There is also a provision to allow those 55 and older to "buy into Medicare coverage." This brings up several questions:

Why wouldn't a "not-for-profit" private insurance offering cut into private insurance company profits just the same as a public option would?

If it wouldn't cut into profits, would it provide adequate coverage?

Can the insurance companies be trusted not to hide some profit in the "not-for-profit" plan?

Doesn't this leave private insurance companies deciding what treatment patients can have, instead of doctors?

How much will it cost to buy into Medicare, and will the poor be able to afford it?

Frankly, I have learned over my life that private insurance companies simply cannot be trusted to do anything but maximize profits. That's why I support a strong public option. A strong public option is the only way to get private insurance companies to lower their costs and provide adequate coverage.

If the final health care reform package does not contain a public option, it will not be real reform. It will simply be a giant payday for the private insurance companies. I urge all liberal senators to VOTE AGAINST the reform package if it doesn't contain a strong public option.

If we can't have real reform, then private insurance doesn't deserve a huge payday.

P.S. -- Isn't it time to replace Harry Reid as Majority Leader?