The Democratic debates suffer from a nasty case of "Plan-itis"

[ehrnst]

Drew Altman is president and chief executive of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

This week’s Democratic debates have had a nasty case of Plan-itis, especially when it comes to health care. It’s important that candidates have plans for what to do about health-care costs and coverage. But we’re way too focused on the details of candidates’ policy plans, and it’s not serving the voters’ needs well.

Every big health reform plan has tradeoffs and winners and losers — no exceptions. It’s not really a huge contribution to voters for debate moderators to find elements of the candidate’s plans they can nail them on. Voters don’t focus on the details of plans; they use them as proxies or signals to figure out what candidates are really about and how they differ from other candidates. What voters really need to know is where candidates would take the health system, how they differ from other candidates on direction and basic choices and what that says about the kind of president they would be.

No plan proposed today will become law in any recognizable form. The details of any plan — the role of private insurance, new taxes, consumer cost sharing or how much providers are paid — will all be subject to heavy negotiation and compromise as they are written into legislation, get a score from the Congressional Budget Office and face scrutiny from the two parties and lobbyists.

...........................................................

We recently conducted focus groups with likely voters in swing districts across the country. Some conclusions:

-Voters are not tuned into the details — or even the broad outlines — of the health policy debates going on in Washington and on the campaign trail, even though they say health care will be at least somewhat important to their vote. Many had never heard the term “Medicare-for-all,” and very few had heard about Medicare or Medicaid buy-in proposals.

-When asked what they knew about Medicare-for-all, few offered any description beyond “everyone gets Medicare,” and almost no one associated the term with a single-payer system or national health plan.

- One focus group participant said: “You listen to it but it all sounds like the teacher on Snoopy – wah wah wah.”

- Overall voters were focused almost entirely on their out-of-pocket costs, not the merits of policy proposals, which they could not easily connect to their own difficulty paying medical bills.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/01/democratic-debates-suffer-nasty-case-plan-itis/

[Hoyt]

1. This voter would like to hear basics of what candidates plan on taking into the General Election.

I want to beat trump and GOPers.

A Plan that will ultimately prove to cost voters more than they think just before the election -- whether it is taxes, premiums, impact on economy, etc. -- will hurt our chances.

Covering everyone should be a given, but how we get there matters.

[ehrnst]

2. I think that spending 45 minutes of a debate on it when there really isn't much more than

saying, I'm going to move toward single payer, or I'm going to work on the ACA is all that's really relevant at this point to MOST voters.

Hoping that the Kaiser Family Foundation will have another candidates' forum on their healthcare reform plans like they did in 2008, and that gives the candidate 20 minutes to lay out their plan, then be answer questions from a few experts for another 40 minutes.

A debate really isn't a good forum to try to get into details of something as complex as health care reform.

[Hoyt]

4. I don't. Sooner or later, the cost and details are going to become an issue.

All else equal, I'll vote in the primaries for the Democrat with the best plan that won't be shot out of the water in September and October 2020.

I agree a debate isn't a good forum for the details, but there are other forums. A candidate offering "free" healthcare with no coinsurance or deductibles, full coverage of dental and hearing aids, etc., needs to define "free" and chances of passage. Also, they need to define how that fits in with free college, forgiving college debt, jobs, climate change, infrastructure, education, deficit and debt reduction, child care, etc.

[ehrnst]

5. That's why I hope that KFF will have another candidates' forum on health care reform alone.

A debate isn't going to let a candidate really lay out the important details, or respond to questions from health policy experts.

[JI7]

3. yes, and Biden has benefited the most from it and i really think it has

hurt Harris the most.

[brooklynite]

6. In 2008, Gov. Tom Vilsack advocated the "10 word message"

You can have a policy paper on your website, but campaigning has to be simple and digestible.