Health Bill Fiendishly Hard to Call
Lack of fundamental reform makes it a narrow no for Brooks
By Rob Quinn,  Newser Staff
Posted Dec 18, 2009 1:20 AM CST
"If this bill passes, you'll have 500 experts in Washington trying to hold down costs and 300 million Americans with the same old incentives to get more and more care," Brooks writes.   (Shutter Stock)

(Newser) – David Brooks would vote no if he were a senator deciding on the health care bill today. But he admits that the pros and cons are so finely balanced that he flip-flops from week to week. The bill should be supported because it takes the deficit seriously, will provide insurance to another 30 million Americans, and probably represents the last chance in a long time to reform the health care system, Brooks writes in the New York Times.

The bill should be opposed because it doesn't fundamentally reform a system "rotten to the bone with opaque pricing and insane incentives," Brooks writes. The bill will cause health care spending to rise even faster and it will set up a "politically unsustainable" situation which will eventually strip it of its good aspects. "Unless you get the fundamental incentives right, the politics will be terrible forever and ever," he warns.

 

My Take on This Story
Show results without voting  |  
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%