Jacob Hacker Supports Health Care Bill

2:10 pm EST December 20th, 2009 | News | 8 Comments

Hacker was one of the big thinkers behind the idea of the public option

As weak as it is in numerous areas, the Senate bill contains three vital reforms. First, it creates a new framework, the ‘exchange,’ through which people who lack secure workplace coverage can obtain the same kind of group health insurance that workers in large companies take for granted. Second, it makes available hundreds of billions in federal help to allow people to buy coverage through the exchanges and through an expanded Medicaid program. Third, it places new regulations on private insurers that, if properly enforced, will reduce insurers’ ability to discriminate against the sick and to undermine the health security of Americans.

These are signal achievements, and they all would have been politically unthinkable just a few years ago.

Topic: Health Care, Jacob Hacker, Public Option

« Al Franken On Why He Supports The Health Care Bill
This Snow Ain’t Going Anywhere »

8 Responses to “Jacob Hacker Supports Health Care Bill”

jr says:

December 20, 2009 at 4:07 pm

Will Lieberman be against the bill now that Hacker is for it?
willf says:

December 20, 2009 at 5:30 pm

new regulations on private insurers that, if properly enforced, will reduce insurers’ ability to discriminate against the sick

Those three words: “if properly enforced”, that’s where all the trouble comes from. Properly enforced regulations against huge corporations aren’t seen as something valuable or even attainable by this congress or the administration.

The GOP thugs hate any enforcement, and the Democrats won’t do anything to upset their donors.

So, you know, proper enforcement? Not so much.
Rex Mundane says:

December 20, 2009 at 5:44 pm

I love the continued idealism of the “if properly enforced” too. Hey, I know its been painful to watch the legislation be gutted as we’ve been spineless and incapable of pushing what we want, but we’re going to assume that, once this passes, then all of a magical sudden everything will work absolutely perfectly and wonderfully and fantastical ponies will carry us off to fairy land.

And this is, of course, the Pragmatic, Realist opinion on reform. That if we pass it, we’ll have universal healthcare maybe someday because everything in the bill as it is will be interpreted as intended and handled with perfect understanding.
Jaim says:

December 20, 2009 at 8:23 pm

He supports a bill we might get, not the one as it currently exists.
Wellescent Health Blog says:

December 20, 2009 at 11:27 pm

Far too little media emphasis has been placed on these sorts of important reforms as the discussions on abortion, a lower Medicare age and the public option have been given center stage. It is because of these types of crucial improvements that we have to remind those on the left that killing the bill is truly a destructive idea based largely on ideology and not on practicality.
Wilbur says:

December 21, 2009 at 12:00 am

I love the continued idealism of the “if properly enforced” too.

And I love the continued idealism of thinking that there any chance whatsoever that we’ll see a reform bill we like better in the next five years or so if we say no to this one.
Rex Mundane says:

December 21, 2009 at 12:17 am

Oh, oh yeah? Well, well, know what I love is the… uh… the idea that by effectively giving up on abortion now we can take it back relatively soon and without incident, so there infinity!

Oh, but yeah, we’ll pass it and see even further reforms at a brisk pace. I mean this bill just flew through the legislative process, and entirely intact too, didn’t it? So no worries whatsoever, certainly not having watched the democrats let the opposition control the narrative utterly on this issue, letting themselves get walked upon by DroopyDawg Lieberman and crew, only being able to even bring it to a vote through outright bribing Nelson with, among other things, promising not to change things even slightly. So yeah, things are gonna change but big ‘n quick, they are. Betcha I’ll be able to see a doctor any decade now…
Tiberious says:

December 21, 2009 at 3:18 am

Let me put this scenario out there and see who can effectively provide a strong case why it won’t, in fact, come to pass:

The Senate bill passes and in a few years, mandates kick in, forcing people to buy junk insurance with an actuarial value of just 60%. Many families can’t afford even this junk insurance, which does nothing to slow the current pace of medical bankruptcies, weakens some forms of private insurance, and puts a potentially significant new tax on the backs of these same families so they can subsidize the Insurance monopolies to cover the poor. Insurers continue to jack up rates, particularly on older Americans (the current bill allows a whopping 1:3 ratio, and more and more find themselves slipping below the subsidy threshold toward poverty. Now, with the numbers of impoverished Americans unable to afford insurance growing even faster than before and needing greater subsidies to buy the federally mandated 60% trash coverage. There is a second round of health care reform debate, but the insurance industry, flush with billions in federal subsidies, buys off the Senate even more easily than before. That’s right, just as the banks used TARP money to beat back stronger regulation, so too will the insurance industry (and big pharma, etc.) use this bill to fatten their coffers with tax payer funds to crush any future efforts at “improving” this bill. So what happens? Why, the government has no choice but to increase taxes to cover the growing spread. That’s right MORE money to the insurance monopolies (don’t forget, the anti-trust law is staying put). Much like the bank bailouts, which Obama wants to make a feature and not a bug (Resolution Authority for Large, Interconnected Financial Companies Act of 2009), this bill would make Federal “bailouts” of the Health Insurance industry law. Corporatism in the U.S. is reaching a critical stage, and this bill is a big step down that road.