Healthcare: The Speaker Is Right!
August 30, 2009 – 11:54 amNot Nancy Pelosi. Andy Diillon (D-Redford) of Michigan. He’s going up against public employee unions (one official caled it ‘an act of war’) by proposing that all public employees - state civil servants, teachers, county and municipal employees, and so on – be placed under a uniform health care plan. Estimated savings: About half of the projected Michigan state budget deficit, which is in the $2,000,000,000 range. For a Democrat, especially the sitting Speaker of the Michigan House, to propose this is either a profile in courage or political suicide – possibly both.
Bold leadership is as needed as it is lacking, both in Michigan and in Washington, D.C. The current generation of politicians seem to be more concerned with ideological purity and self-righteousness than with getting things done. Speaker Dillon’s proposal is a breath of fresh air. As someone who would be affected by this plan, I can say that I support it. There may be details of it that should be changed, but the general thrust – consolidation in the name of cost savings, as opposed to denial of benefits – cannot be argued with my any but sophists who put their own interests ahead of those of the public.
This bill would likely result in diminishing the benefits of those with the most-generous plans. It is highly unlikely that it would lead to so large and influential a group as all public employees at all non-Federal levels in Michigan having shoddy health benefits. Given the huge budget crisis upon Michigan, not doing this means that nearly a billion dollars would have to be cut elsewhere, likely causing deeper and more widespread pain than the relatively mild hurt that some of the currently most-fortunate will feel.
Andy Dillon deserves our praise for, if nothing else, stepping up and taking the heat with his bold proposal.
One Response to “Healthcare: The Speaker Is Right!”
I think our naming conventions are out of date. You’ll hear the radio and tv blatherers on both sides wax rhapsodic on the perfection of the “two party system” and how third party folks are “fringe” and will “never matter”. This is because they like their power and/or influence. But as this post shows, some (very few?) democrats can make sense. On the Elefink side the statists and the originalists co-exist by some miracle. Let’s have parties that truly represent political demographics instead of time serving power seekers who have no firm principles at all.
By Nik on Sep 1, 2009