As we wade into party competition we should discuss the ideological divisions over perhaps the most controversial component of current health care proposals, the public option. This would allow government to set up a publicly financed insurance option for the general public that would compete with existing insurance plans.
Liberal and conservative would already differ over the idea that government in general and the federal government in particular, would offer anything beyond basic services. The liberal desire for equal access to services, in this case access to health care, leads to governmental involvement since such access would be considered to be a right. The conservative position would hold that government is minimizing the freedom of individuals to make choices for themselves, and intruding on the ability of people to offer services in the market. The entry of a large entity like government would distort the competitive process and eradicate the efficiencies that markets can provide.
Here's additional info and commentary:
- The Public Option and the Hope of Health Care Reform.
- Debating the Public Option.
- The Pitfalls of the Public Option.
- The Public Option Two Step.
From my perspective the dispute boils down to whether one trusts the private or public sector more with this basic service, which is the essence of ideological dispute.
Some of the articles above refer to a single payer system, which would remove the private sector altogether from this market. People would be given some form of payment, voucher or whatever, and use it to select among providers for their health services.
- Wikipedia: Single Payer Health Care.
- What is Single Payer?
