Public Option Trigger? How about a PRIVATE Option Trigger?

the upcoming film '2012'.

Fat lot of good it will do us.

I like this article. Here's another perspective:

Considering the restrictions on the public option, there are doubts as to its effectiveness as a cost-control measure in the first place.

That is, rather than dropping single payer INSTANTLY, say that we'll go with the public option as a mid-way tool, but if that doesn't bring the privates in line, then we go with single payer...

'just saying

Consider this.

I.
The proposed trigger kicks in if the private option fails to deliver. In other words, first we amend the current system as little as possible, and if that doesn't work then we do some serious carving. The serious carving will involve dislocation of people from their current policies, will require abolishing one (private) bureaucracy and hiring a second (federal) bureaucracy. The carving will require rafts of regulations and procedures. The carving will require amendments to the tax code and to budgets. The rippling in the economy will be rather large, and unpredictable: The CBO uses moderate assumptions, but they admit there's a huge margin of error.

In other words, first we try things that require minor changes, and then we have major changes if the minor ones don't work.

II.
Your proposed trigger flips it around. First we do the serious carving. We have rather large dislocations in the marketplace, we hire lots of federal workers and dispose of lots of private workers. We produce and implement rafts of regs and procedures. We'd alter the tax code and let the ripples go through the economy for 20 months. During those 20 months they're be the suggestion that we're not quite serious, which may make implement half-hearted. Or perhaps the implementation will be all the more vehement because it's just a test.

Then, if we find the public option as implemented doesn't work, we pull the trigger. We undo the tax changes, we undo the changes to the law and regs and procedures. We rehire all the private workers and fire all the public employees. We make the probably extensive ripples unripple.


Which is easier? Which is less disruptive? Which could be undone more easily? Which sequencing is reasonable, and preserves the two options as two options? Could we ever undo the public option? I doubt it. More likely, if we don't find that it works the tension won't be between returning to a mostly privatized system but going to a more federalized, governmentalized system--while it's offered as a way of testing two specific options, in practice the choice will be changed mid-stream, and predictably so for all the denials. Also, since it increases the power of government, it's even more likely than allowing the trigger to be pulled the trigger will be taped in place and Congress will regularly override that particular provision.