Does opposing the current health care bills equate to "opposing health care reform"?

[Pangloss]

Simple question. If you're opposed to the current pair of bills (one in the House, one in the Senate) before the US congress on health care reform, are you opposed to health care reform in general? Or can you be in favor of reform but opposed to these bills? What is your opinion?

 

I ask because some of the threads around here, and some of the discourse I see out in the media, seem to equate the two. In my opinion you can be opposed to these specific bills but still be in favor of reform.

[bascule]

I support HR 676, i.e. single-payer healthcare.

[JohnB]

I think it's more about scoring political points than anything else.

 

For the proponents of the current bills, an admission that you can be for reform but against the bills is an admission that the bills might not be the "only" or "right" way to reform the system.

 

Nobody in politics wants to admit that their opponents can actually have a sensible idea.

 

Don't worry, the malaise is not restricted to the US.

[navigator]

I am completely for health care reform, but completely against expanding the government to do it, unless in an effort to more effectively regulate private health insurers and the drug cos. I also think the lobbyists are an issue that needs to be addressed.

[padren]

Can you support "Political Reform" without supporting Fidel Castro?

 

Naturally the answer is "of course" but I don't think that is really the question on your mind... if I was to humbly guess, it would be "Why do so many people automatically assume you are against health care reform if you are against current health care bills and fail to separate the two?"

 

If I was to guess to an answer, it would boil down to "health care reform" in their mind (unless watered down to generalities) means something to the effect of either government involvement or guaranteed coverage of some sort... and even if you are in favor of that definition of health care reform that they hold, if you are against the bill they have too much distrust resulting from hearing that line in the past "oh, I am in favor of reform, if you present something that isn't tragically flawed" from people who oppose any government involvement or guaranteed coverage.

 

There are those who say they aren't opposed to that "in theory" but also believe it is theoretically impossible based on their other metrics that their idea of reform requires - so they bait the former group with "fool's errand" style requests to find a suitable solution without ever expecting one to be found that both parties would agree to. They are happy to use that stall because they believe not doing anything is better than any reform that does what those people want to do.

 

So when you say you are in favor of reform, but not these bills, they feel the bite of people who used that line to stall the progress they wanted - it has nothing to do with you of course, just their own personal baggage.

 

And so is life.

[Pangloss]

Well put.

[DJBruce]

I am personally against the government extending itself any further into providing healthcare for people, but am for the government imposing reform to private healthcare, similar to John Mackey's proposal.