White House responds to citizens group

Michael Leavitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services, has responded to the Citizens Health Care Working Group and its proposal to bring universal healthcare to the United States.

"Well isn't that nice for you?" he said. Or words to that effect.

The working group was a massive, cross-country effort to collect input from Americans about what kind of healthcare system they'd like to see. The group did not originally offer the choice of single-payer universal healthcare, didn't include it in discussions — but people wouldn't shut up about it, and so single-payer got through the door after all.

According to Leavitt, in a letter reporting to Cheney regarding the administration response to the group: "The Working Group chose an approach based on mandates and government intervention rather than an approach emphasizing consumer choice and options."

"The major areas of disagreement," wrote Leavitt "include the establishment of a national commission to define a core health benefit — an idea that the Federal Government can choose the best set of benefits for all Americans."

Leavitt returns to this several times — the insurance industry and their political toadies evidently think it's a good talking point. "The Administration believes it would be impossible for a federally appointed board to define a single benefit package that is able to address the diverse needs of Americans in their different income, family, geography, and health circumstances."

What does that mean? Could it be that Congressmen in Washington, D.C., after the birth of, say, a child with hemophilia, would expect his baby to be cared for, but that a poor father in Montana wouldn't want the same thing?

Or does it mean that a healthy, married Virginia socialite, after suffering major injuries in a car accident, would prefer to have all her medical needs seen to, but that a diabetic single mom wouldn't want the same?

"It would be impossible for a federally appointed board to define a single benefit package that is able to address the diverse needs of Americans in their different income, family, geography, and health circumstances."

I find it difficult to come up with the words that can express my outrage at that idea.