One of my pet peeves is the inability of Republicans to properly message their ideas as well as Democrats, making their solutions look inferior, even when they’re not.  Because the Left has the advantage of throwing your money at any given problem, they will always appear to be more proactive and giving on the surface, though that activity may cause bigger problems.  One of the best examples of this is the debate over how to fix the nation’s health-care system, in which no one outside of GOP politicians or activists can articulate what exactly a Republican plan looks like.  I have written before that Republican health-care solutions are often assumed to be simply ‘don’t screw it up any more.’  The “cost-shifting” phenomenon is a good example, because it appears that private insurance rates are inefficient and needlessly expensive, while Medicare is the fiscally responsible option.  Clearly this is not so, but some cheap talk and the fallacy of government efficiency make it appear so to the casual observer – a phenomenon that GOP leadership needs to combat. 

Because Medicare and other government health-care programs control such a huge part of the market, they are often able to negotiate lower costs for services at clinics and hospitals.  These facilities make up for the differences in income by either reducing staff or charging higher rates to private insurance companies, who pass on the cost to the consumer in their higher premiums.  In a nutshell, this is ‘cost-shifting.’  Legislators in favor of nationalized health care packages are able to point to this phenomenon and say that the government should clearly have 100% of the market, leading to lower negotiated rates and savings for everybody. 

 However, evidence shows that the effects are really quite ephemeral – after an initial jump in private insurance costs, the remainder of the burden is placed upon other government insurance programs.  In some targeted scenarios, Medicare actually sees higher increases than private insurance plans to cover for the deficiencies of Medicaidpayment plans. The cost-shifting phenomenon cited by so many in favor of single-payer health care is shown now to be an isolated response to severe overpayments elsewhere.  In light of that, the plans do not appear to be at all tenable for the future.

Essentially, our tax dollars are being spent inefficiently in a couple of places to make nationalized health insurance look good in a couple of other places, making Medicare and its smaller add-ons more of a short-term tax on the wealthy to pay for the health costs of the poor.  But wait!  The rich aren’t even the ones who feel the pain the most – they continue to pay in cost-shifting studies, whereas small businesses with benefits packages feel the pinch and often are forced to drop their coverage all together.  Therein lay the true victims of this whole scenario, as government inefficiencies in large-scale coverage artificially raise private prices, while only lowering their own as in a mirage. 

 So how do Republicans combat these misconceptions?  It used to be that public insurance programs were universally panned and that the disgust at their existence was all that was needed to crush any proposed expansion.  Now, with higher costs across the board and an economic pinch, people are hungry for a solution.  If we think the Dems’ solution is insufficient, then we must present an alternative, instead of just staying away. 

 Republicans going forward must do what Sen. McCain never really could – explain to people what truly nationwide competition would mean for them in terms of the dollars and cents in their monthly budgets.  Competition reduces prices, just as Medicare did in that one specific instance, but without the holes in reduction that lead to exorbitant make-up charges elsewhere, because anyone who feels that their local providers are not adequate can buy from anyone else in the country. 

 I know that it’s hard to imagine tax credits nowadays, but given enough time to process the situation, people should be receptive to having the money and purchasing power in their own hands.  They will be able to see some private insurers do things the right way and succeed, while others fail, and then put their family’s money toward the right one.  No taxation to pay for other people’s mistakes or to cover up inefficiencies – something everyday people can certainly rally around. 

 Republican politicians and activists must go forward in the face of this new push for universal coverage with specific ideas about why their way is better, instead of just repeating the same lines about the failures of the other plan.  This will require a more well-versed caucus and grassroots efforts, but is that so much to ask?  After all, this is your health we’re talking about here.  The easier approach of playing the bogeyman and moving on no longer works – it’s time we read up on the specific numbers and start going toe-to-toe with the deception of nationalized care.

Last 5 posts by Gideon D'Assandro

• The Reality of Racial Politics - August 17th, 2009
• Thank God Obama's President - August 3rd, 2009
• Health Care Coverup - July 23rd, 2009
• The Suppressed EPA Report’s Effect on Healthcare - July 12th, 2009
• Social Conservatism Going Forward - July 5th, 2009