Mary Jo Kilroy is not so clear on that one

Not only did Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH-15), my local Congresswoman, took a long time to send her response to my email, she does not use the term "public option", in spite of the fact that I commended her for supporting it in her public statements. Here is the complete text of her email:

Thank you for contacting me about health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

The cost of health care is one of the most pressing issues in our country and that is why it is at the top of my agenda for this year. Health care needs a uniquely American solution to the challenges of cost, quality and accessibility. Reform must include the choice and freedom that Americans with health care have come to expect. The most important change I hope most Americans will see is the cost of health care expenses going down.

Americans need quality health care that is affordable and accessible and also guaranteed. Health care is vital to our economic recovery and reducing our long term spending. Businesses are paying too much for health care and all of us pay the "hidden tax" of the uninsured. Moving our country forward will depend upon reducing the cost and increasing the choices in health care. I hope to work with my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to craft this reform.

Thank you again for taking the time to reach out to me. Please contact me if I can be of further assistance.

The email is at best, vague, and meant for a middle-of-the-line independent/centrist voter. I have a feeling that many of the elected officials are mis-calculating the support for the public option, and may pay for it dearly in the next elections, a la Al Gore in 2000.

Sen. Sherrod Brown reiterates support for the public option

In a response to my email, U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) states (only part of the email reproduced) :

Since first coming to Congress in 1993, I have refused to enroll in the coverage offered to members of Congress until every American has access to high-quality, affordable health insurance. Should a health care reform bill pass that offers a public insurance option, I would be pleased to enroll.

I strongly believe that our health care system is in need of reform. First and foremost, we must reduce the long-term growth of health care costs for patients, taxpayers, and businesses; protect families from bankruptcy or debt because of health expenditures; guarantee a choice of doctors and health plans; invest in prevention and wellness; improve patient safety and quality of care; assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans; and end barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.

What the insurance industry needs is some healthy competition from a public insurance option. This option would not replace employer-sponsored coverage and no one would be forced into it; the public option would simply give uninsured or underinsured Americans the choice of enrolling in an insurance plan that does not engage in the same cost-avoidance tactics as private insurance plans do. The public health insurance option would also be a vehicle for improvements in quality, coverage, and provider-access that sets the bar higher for private insurance plans. This option would be available to all Americans: both private and government employees, including members of Congress and their staffs.

It's great to have such folks in the U.S. Senate!

Healthcare quotes

Quotes from today's web on Obama's healthcare plans:

Karl Rove writes in the nation's trusted newspaper, WSJ (see my earlier post):
On Tuesday, Gallup showed Mr. Obama’s personal approval was 55%, down from more than 60% a few weeks ago and lower than the 56% George W. Bush had at this point in his first term.

Didn’t know 1% made all that difference. I guess he didn't get to take a Statistics course, before dropping out of college...twice!

Betsy McCaughey using the same mouthpiece:

Since Medicare was established in 1965, access to care has enabled older Americans to avoid becoming disabled and to travel and live independently instead of languishing in nursing homes….. Medicare has made living to a ripe old age a good value. ObamaCare will undo that.

So, Medicare is good, in spite of being run by the....government, while insurance run by the same government can wreak havoc.

Intershame frames the debate quite well:

Complaining that a inherently socialist concept like insurance - the collection of funds by many to redistribute to the needy - will somehow be more socialist if the government gets involved is laughable.

while Gail Collins at The New York Times blames Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT):

Meanwhile in the Senate, everyone is waiting on Max Baucus of Montana. Nothing is going to happen on health care without the approval of Baucus, whose vast authority stems from the fact that he speaks for both the Senate Finance Committee and a state that contains three-tenths of one percent of the country’s population (emphasis mine).