HHS Secretary Sebelius favors level playing field so that healthcare doesn't tilt toward public plan

[Better Believe It]

In a NPR interview, she said "What is important is that we have a level playing field (with private insurance) so that you don't tilt it toward a public company".

Well, if the public plan does not have advantages in benefits and costs over private insurance, why would anyone want it?

Without such benefits and savings a public plan would be a bogus plan that can only aide the insurance industry.

Listen to the interview at:

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=105442888&m=105458342

[DrToast]

1. If it doesn't have to make a profit, it would have an advantage

[villager]

2. ah, those winds of "change..."

n/t

[kenny blankenship]

3. "We are one nation, and our time to outlaw Single Payer Universal Healthcare has come"

[avaistheone1]

4. God forbid health care would tilt toward a public plan.

:sarcasm:


At some point in the conversation it needs to be stated that in no other industrialized country are health care insurance companies allowed to run as a profit-making entities for essential health care services.

[RDANGELO]

5. It's going to be a long fight.

The health insurance companies have a lot of money, which means a lot of clout. They are going to have to be gradually knocked down like the tobacco companies in the 60s Through the 80s. Once the public plan is established, I think it is inevitable.

[MarjorieG]

6. It's non-threatening pitch, and cost cutting will be imposed on insurance companies.

That's also leveling the playing field.

[subterranean]

7. I still don't know what "level playing field" means

Does it mean the public plan would not be allowed to undercut the rates charged by private companies? That would sort of defeat the purpose of having a public option.

[WinkyDink]

8. Will the profits be levelled, as well?