Argument: Public insurance bureaucracies are better than private ones
Brian Barringer. "Case against public option cuts both ways". Las Vegas Sun. Aug. 12, 2009: "Recently I went to my local pharmacy to get a prescription refilled, as prescribed by my doctor. The pharmacist said he could not fill my prescription because my insurance company allows only so many pills of this medication to be dispensed per patient each 30 days. The pharmacist said I could purchase the medication prescribed for $145 or I could wait another week and come back and get the prescription filled after I was past the 30-day mark.
The people so concerned about health care reform are worried about the government getting in between the patient and doctor, but it seems they do not mind if the health insurance companies get in the middle of the patient and doctor relationship. My health insurance company just overrode my doctor’s order for my treatment. Apparently they think they can make a better decision.
I have just one question for those who disrupt town-hall meetings about the health care issue: Where is your outrage when the health insurance companies interfere with the patient-doctor relationship?
Seems a little hypocritical to me."
Paul Waldman. "The ten dumbest arguments against health reform". The American Prospect. July 28, 2009: "If this health reform passes, some bureaucrat might be able to dictate what care you can get, standing between you and your doctor. This may well be the most widespread and pernicious of all the dumb arguments against health-care reform. It certainly has some intuitive appeal, as long as you don't think about it for more than three or four seconds. Who wants some snotty bureaucrat telling my doctor what to do? That would be awful!
So true -- you'd never want a government bureaucrat getting between you and your doctor. Much better to have your care controlled by an entire team of insurance-company bureaucrats, whose bonuses and promotions depend on denying your claims and limiting your care. That is, if you have a plan in the first case, what with their denial of your pre-existing conditions and their attempts to kick you off your policy if you actually get sick. That's so much better than letting some government bureaucrat get involved."