Why couldn't states just make their own "public option"?

[Meister]

Some states can, it all depends on their state constitutions.

Fiscally they can't because their bond ratings would dip, and their interest rates on loans would increase, and interest rates bonds that they sell would rise.

California is currently operating in the red, and they're not the only one.

And their bond rating is what?
How much interest do the pay on their bonds that they sell?
When borrowing what is the interest rate?

This is not rocket science, Vast. A state can't afford to operate in the red like Ca. for very long.

 

[Navy1960]

First let me say that the thread authors question is a perfect one in the healthcare debate, because it is exactly where a healthcare public option belongs. Why?, because number one, states are the only ones and the people in them under our constitution that are best suited to say "yes" or "no" to a public option healthcare plan. Yes some states like Mass. and Hi. already have a form of a public option and it can be argued that even state Medicaid is a form of a public option as well. However, a plan that EVERYONE can buy into is well withing the power of the people of an individual state to decide. It has been tried as rightly pointed out in a few states and because of the sheer cost associated with it, it was a disaster in those states. One of the real reasons why states prefer that the Federal Govt. be the ones to administer a public option regardless of the constitution, is because of this cost and the burden it places upon them. However, as to the original thread question, a state can pass a public option and for that matter have single payer if the people in that state should so decide and there is really nothing that would prevent that constitutionally in my opinion. Then again, there is that cost thing and if a state should so decide to go this route, they may find themselves in hot water if they seek to prevent a private business from providing insurance insurance in thier state should someone have it. What such a system would eventually do, is seperate people into the "haves" i.e. great healthcare and the "have-nots" state govt. healthcare, not a whole lot different than the current healthcare bill in the Seante.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

MOST AMERICANS don't want any kind of public option

Actually, most Americans DO want a public option.

 

[Vast LWC]

I think perhaps some folks on the right side of the fence are confusing the terms "Universal Healthcare" and "Public option".

Massachusetts does not actually have a "Public Option", just enforced universal healthcare.

TennCare is a extension of Medicaid, and thus is also not a "Public Option".

A Public Option is simply a medical insurance plan that is SOLD by the Government, not a free medicaid plan, or Universal Healthcare.

 

[Navy1960]

The MassHealth program provides comprehensive health insurance — or help in paying for private health insurance — to more than one million Massachusetts children, families, seniors, and people with disabilities.
MassHealth - Health and Human Services

While it's true by definition of Universal Healthcare or helathcare in the form of a public option as proposed by the House and killed by the Senate reflects Govt. provided, purchasable healthcare insurance. To say that Medicaid is not a " public option" is mere symantics, because it is health insurance provided by the Govt.

 

[Vast LWC]

The MassHealth program provides comprehensive health insurance — or help in paying for private health insurance — to more than one million Massachusetts children, families, seniors, and people with disabilities.
MassHealth - Health and Human Services

While it's true by definition of Universal Healthcare or helathcare in the form of a public option as proposed by the House and killed by the Senate reflects Govt. provided, purchasable healthcare insurance. To say that Medicaid is not a " public option" is mere symantics, because it is health insurance provided by the Govt.

I'll give you that. But it is not a "Public Option" in the form we are currently referring to in the discussion of the health care legislation before us.

Perhaps my post was badly worded in that way. TennCare would be a "Public Option", but it would be a FREE Public Option. Which is why it has so many problems.