×
Via the Wonk Room, The Washington Times is flipping out over Tom Daschle's support for a Federal Health Board:
Although his board would technically have no say on the 68 percent of health care that is provided through the private sector, Mr. Daschle modestly adds: “Congress could opt to go further with the Board’s recommendations. It could, for example, link the tax exclusion for health insurance to insurance that complies with the Board’s recommendation.” Those last 19 words would spell the end of independent private-sector health care in America.The clear read of this paragraph is that linking an optional government tax subsidy to insurance regulations would mean the end of independent private sector health care in America. The Washington Times' preferred reality is one in which the government tax subsidy is gratefully accepted by businesses, but not linked to regulations, as that apparently keeps private sector health care "independent." It's a very odd use of the word "independent." But you're going to see a lot of this sort of thing as Daschle's ideas migrate into the mainstream of the health care debate. Particularly because the success advocates are having at putting the idea into policy is far outpacing their success at communicating it to the public. Max Baucus's health care plan has a variant on the idea in its Independent Health Coverage Council staffed by experts in "insurance, health benefit design, actuarial science, medicine, business, and consumer protections." The Massachusetts health reforms have something similar in the "Connector Board." So you may want to read Daschle explaining exactly what the Federal Health Board is designed to do, and what problems it's designed to address:
