After a lengthy lament about the Democrats’ lack of a unifying message in his piece in The New Republic, Alex Shephard accidentally lurches into a very interesting observation:
Israel argued that “Democrats have it wrong that they need a national-message template in the first place. Past elections have shown that the most effective messaging is local and specific to each district.†This year’s election seems to be proving this true, or at least Democratic candidates are campaigning as if it is. By and large, they are running on a single issue. It’s not impeachment or collusion or corruption or #MeToo; it’s not even specific to Trump. The election, for many Democrats, is all about health care.
That’s certainly true here in Illinois. Just about every Democratic candidate for statewide office is running on health care, either emphasizing his or her support for the Affordable Care Act or criticizing his or her opponent’s position on treatment of pre-existing conditions.
I can’t help but wonder if Republicans, in their obsession with “repealing ObamaCare”, a goal that remains beyond their grasp, have unwittingly done Democrats’ political advertising for them.
Sadly, none of these political pitches come to terms with the genuinely hard questions that lurk behind making health care a right. If you can save one kid’s life by spending a million dollars and a thousand kids’ lives by spending $1,000 each, which do you do? If your answer is “both”, where do you get the money? And how do you handle the reality that there is no maximum level of spending? To the best of my knowledge no OECD country has an actual right to health care; all limit access in some way to control costs.
“To the best of my knowledge no OECD country has an actual right to health care; all limit access in some way to control costs.â€
Economics – “to economize.†All the rest is just free beer for everyone.
Healthcare is definitely a pocket-book issue. Here in Colorado, the Democrats are running on reducing the out-of-pocket costs. The GoP is running on an anti-socialized medicine platform. Both are wrong on the merits as they don’t address the core problem, but electorally the Democratic message is probably better. The GoP doesn’t seem to have a coherent answer to the healthcare problem.
I don’t know what you think the “core problem” is but I’ll volunteer what I think it is. Health care costs are too high. If you increase demand and cap supply I’m not sure what else you’d expect.
It’s also true about the contested Congressional seat I live near (gerrymandered Blue; always held Red). How do we know that healthcare isn’t the national message? The parties have national committees that are supposed to help candidates, at least when Clinton isn’t borrowing heavily from them.
Dave,
I pretty much agree with you on healthcare.
Here in Nebraska there is a bill on the Nov. ballot to vastly expand medicaid to able-bodied, low income adults. State constitution requires a balanced budget. Point is, this is about the only item that will affect voter turnout. One R Gov., One R. senator, two R. Reps on ballot. Therefore, since the medicaid bill is the only unsettled issue, it will affect turnout and then maybe the office races.
I should add that the Republicans’ strategy which seems to be hoping the whole thing would go away is very unlikely to work. No matter how much they hate socialized medicine we’re going to continue to subsidize health care for some people. If we subsidize it for everybody we aren’t subsidizing it for anybody, we’re just pushing prices up. And if we subsidize too many people’s health care it will be unworkable. It’s a tough call and they’re refusing to make it.
Well, any welfare program for healthcare will go broke unless it requires co-pays, and if you say the underclass can’t do that, I say you underestimate them. At any rate any society where men are cared for without work is doomed. So we, (Govt.?) if that’s our daddy, must require work of men, any work of which they are capable. Or, yes, their loved ones will die if they take ill. Don’t lie to them about this eventuality, or they will fail to exert themselves for their family.
“To the best of my knowledge no OECD country has an actual right to health care; all limit access in some way to control costs.”
Most people will think of access as the ability to have ANY health care. Most OECD countries make sure everyone has access to some level of health care. They do limit access by not paying for any care that is available, though they often do that by not paying for care that doesn’t work or has bad QALY numbers.
AFAICT the GOP never really has a health care plan. They aren’t that interested in the issue. If you let he Democrats do it, they will cut costs, but probably not in an especially good way.
Steve
Frankly, I doubt it. Cutting costs will get them no votes.
The ‘right’ to unlimited health care (one of the demands of Sanders and the DSA) can be described as a right to other people’s money whenever you want it or need it. Of course it never works the other way.