We argued that the real problem with health care in these Untied States of America is that, in order to have access to health care, you have to have a job. Untether one from the other, I wrote, and you’ll not only drastically improve health care, but you’ll also create at our society’s very foundation a more innovative, more entrepreneurial nation.
Last evening, appearing on the Rachel Maddow Show, a leader of the Democratic Party at long last picked up and ran with this argument.
Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer, a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance. Or that people could start a business and be entrepreneurial and take risks, but not be job-locked because a child has a child has asthma or diabetes or someone in the family is bipolar. You name it, any condition is job-locking. Think of a situation where we can be internationally competitive because we don’t have this weight on us that other countries, that other businesses really don’t have in other countries because they don’t have this expense of health care which will all be reined in, those costs, under this bill.
True health care reform is about freedom. The proposals that are likely to be made into law are fairly useless on this score. I am generally supportive of any effort at this point, but I do think that the mandate without the public option simply delivers more truckloads of munny to Stevie Hemley’s house and accomplishes little else. I think if our leaders had been more forcefully equating universal health care with freedom, it might have served to hand the tea-partiers a nice steaming mug of STFU.