I like Rahm Emanuel's line a lot:
Let's consider Medicare reimbursement rates as an example. A "robust" public option that tied reimbursement rates to Medicare would really help bring down medical costs for enrolled families. But that's out of the question politically, because rural doctors think they're paid less than urban doctors for similar procedures within Medicare already, and rural electeds will say, "No way are you building universal insurance on the back of my constituent doctors.""Let's be honest," Rahm Emanuel said in a recent interview. "The goal isn't to see whether I can pass this through the executive board of the Brookings Institution. I'm passing it through the United States Congress with people who represent constituents."
Thing is, the real "game changers" are inherently speculative, but many of them are in the Senate Finance bill -- an independent Medicare commission, an Innovation Center, pilot programs, comparative research investment, electronic records. Democrats understand how hard it will be to make cuts to Medicare. They understand constituent demands put a straitjacket on cost-control mechanisms. What exactly do they want, or think they can achieve?
This article available online at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/11/health-reform-heavy-on-health-and-light-on-reform/29945/
