Bill Clinton in his presidential campaign caught our attention with the mantra “it’s the economy, stupid.” I’m waiting for the same kind of candor from the current crop of presidential candidates when it comes to health care.
Christopher Lee writes in the Washington Post that no White House hopeful can be taken seriously if they don’t have a plan for improving health care, the number one domestic issue of the campaign. However, he worries that the candidates are focused on universal coverage, while voters are more concerned with curbing health care costs. It’s also no secret that many fear universal coverage will drastically increase health care costs (WSJ subscription required).
As a result, there are good political reasons to avoid the health cost nerve center; it’s too damn painful to the touch when you’re serious. Lee quotes John Rother, policy director for AARP, the Seniors’ lobby:
“The heavy lifting from a candidate’s point of view is what they would do to control costs. Getting everybody covered is significant, but it doesn’t take you right up against the power of the $2 trillion-a-year medical lobby the way that cost containment does. That’s what’s missing in the debate”
Biting the cost bullet means taking a few shots yourself. Let’s see who can do it without shooting themselves in the foot.
