writinginthewild.com

"nothing natural about it!"

  • Home
  • Curriculum Vitae
  • Teaching Materials
    • How to Succeed in an Online Writing Class: Plan, Revise, Discuss
    • Open Source and Free Software for Students
    • Policies for Advanced Composition
    • Bibliography Assignment for Freshman Composition
    • Family Literacy Assignment for Freshman Composition
    • Syllabus for Professional Writing
    • Local Information for Coles County, Illinios
    • Oral Report Assignment for Professional Writing
    • Peer Critique Assignment for Professional Writing
    • Reading Charts
    • Resume/Cover Letter for Introduction to Professional Writing
    • Self-Commentaries
  • Sitemap
  • About
RSS

Coporate America, We Dare You: Support a Public Option

Posted on July 6, 2009 by Ray Watkins
Comments off

Without a public option, the other parties that comprise America’s non-system of health care — private insurers, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, and medical suppliers — have little or no incentive to supply high-quality care at a lower cost than they do now.

Which is precisely why the public option has become such a lightening rod. The American Medical Association is dead-set against it, Big Pharma rejects it out of hand, and the biggest insurance companies won’t consider it. No other issue in the current health-care debate is as fiercely opposed by the medical establishment and their lobbies now swarming over Capitol Hill. Of course, they don’t want it. A public option would squeeze their profits and force them to undertake major reforms. That’s the whole point.

Why the Critics of a Public Option for Health Care Are Wrong, Robert Reich, Tuesday, June 23, 2009

In the early 1980s, in Austin, Texas, there was a punk band called the Dicks. The Dicks had this super song whose title, if I remember correctly, was “We Hate the Rich, They Bore Us.” (Was it really the Dicks? I’d love to hear if I am wrong.) Anyway, when it comes to health care, I think that truism has now been superseded: “We Hate the Rich, They’re Cowards.”

That’s not to say that the rich are any less boring. But I say that because if the rich and/or powerful had a coherent sense of self-interest (or just a time-frame longer than the next year) they would support not just a public option but a single payer plan. With certain exceptions, though, they seem locked into some sort of dysfunctional reasoning that they just can’t seem to escape.

If we had national health care, much of the automobile debacle could have been avoided. Nationals as well as multinationals could compete more effectively with other developed nations. Small businesses could make market ideology seem almost reasonable. The list of good reasons is endless. We’d all benefit, but as with everything, the rich would benefit most. Yet we are told to compromise.

It’s as if an entire class of people rejected anti-viral drugs in the middle of a flu epidemic that was killing thousands. If Wal-Mart and ATT and the like now accept the public option principle as necessary to reform, Obama should consider that the center-right position and negotiate accordingly. If we have to accept compromise, don’t toss the baby out with the bathwater.

Amplify

Categories: Economics, Language, Writing
Notice: This work is licensed under a BY-NC-SA. Permalink: Coporate America, We Dare You: Support a Public Option
Playing for change: War no more trouble
The Bland Leading the Bland

  • Share this Article

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1 other subscriber

  • View James Ray Watkins's profile on LinkedIn
  • Book Cover Image

    Get my book at Southern Illinois University Press, Amazon, or Powell's Books.

     

    The C.C.C.C webpage, A Taste for Language: Literacy, Class, and English Studies includes a short podcast interview with me along with links to these reviews:

    ... by Victor Villanueva in CCC 62.4 (June 2011)
    ... by Chanon Adsanatham in Teaching English in the Two-Year College 38.3 (March 2011)
    ... by Scott McLemee in Inside Higher Education (17 Feb 2010)

    Note: you need to be a member of NCTE, and a subscriber to the relevant journal, to read the reviews by Villanueva and Adsanatham; the review by McLemee is available to the general public.

  • Reading

    • Temple U. Project Ditches Textbooks for Homemade Digital Alternatives - Wired Campus - The Chronicle of Higher Education 2012/02/08
    • 'Change.edu' and the Problem With For-Profits - Commentary - The Chronicle of Higher Education 2012/02/01
    • Jonathan Franzen: E-readers are 'damaging to society' - CSMonitor.com 2012/01/31
    • The Time is Now: Report from the New Faculty Majority Summit | Inside Higher Ed 2012/01/31
  • Recent Comments

    • Irais on Corruption Studies, University Sports Division
    • Merle Carthens on Family Literacy Assignment for Freshman Composition
    • Hellen Wright on Bibliography Assignment for Freshman Composition
    • Queens Studio Cleaning Service on Family Literacy Assignment for Freshman Composition
    • email cover letter on Reading Charts
  • Links

  • Categories

  • Meta

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org
© writinginthewild.com. Proudly Powered by WordPress | Nest Theme by YChong