Log In


Reset Password
  • MENU
    Columnists
    Wednesday, May 01, 2024

    9 years of health care debate and counting

    In 2009, U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney hosted a “town hall” meeting at Montville High School. The tea party movement was in its ascension and Democrats had reached the conclusion that if they were to push the Affordable Care Act through Congress it would have to be without Republican votes.

    That night an angry, motivated, sign-carrying crowd greeted the Democratic congressman, whose Second District covers the eastern half of Connecticut. Many saw the legislation as a Trojan horse that would bring universal, socialized health coverage.

    They made their opposition known, filling the auditorium and spilling into the hallway. Speakers told Courtney the proposed insurance mandate, requiring people to have health insurance or face a penalty, was un-American and unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court would later disagree with the latter point.

    Courtney sought to explain the mandate was necessary since insurers would not be allowed to deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions and had to keep kids on their family’s insurance until age 26. Without a mandate, millions would avoid paying for insurance until they got sick, he said. Insurance companies could not operate under those circumstances.

    Few, it seemed, were buying it.

    Flash forward eight years to Thursday night at Kelly Middle School in Norwich and another Courtney town hall event. This time the audience applauded the congressman, speakers thanking him for his work expanding health care to millions, and urging him to do what he could to preserve and improve the health law.

    Some said Congress should go further, adopting the universal, European-style socialized medicine that those tea partiers decried back in 2009. They filled perhaps half the 500-seat auditorium. Anxiety was more prevalent than anger.

    It is all very odd. For the past four national elections, Republicans have made criticism of “Obamacare” and a vow to repeal it a centerpiece of their campaigns. Politically, it has worked, helping the GOP win control of the Senate, House and presidency.

    Yet now that Republicans are in position to repeal and replace, the crowds are turning out for congressional town hall meetings to plead with their elected leaders to protect their health care. It’s understandable in Connecticut, a blue state that has aggressively supported the ACA. But Republican congressmen in red states are facing the angriest crowds demanding that access to health care be protected.

    “Like the Joni Mitchell song says,” offered Courtney when I noted the irony that Obamacare’s fans are finally speaking out. “You don't know what you've got ‘til it's gone.”

    Or at least you don’t worry about the insurance you’ve got until it’s threatened.

    And it’s threatened.

    House Speaker Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican whose highest priority has always been finding ways to limit government spending and reduce the deficit, has outlined a replacement plan that would result in millions of citizens who have gained insurance again losing it.

    Obama and the Democrats used a vast expansion of Medicaid to provide access to health insurance to those on the lower rungs of the middle-class. Ryan’s plan would stop this expansion in its tracks, allocating and limiting Medicaid to states through block grants, forcing states to decide who would have to again go without coverage.

    It would repeal Obamacare’s taxes and mandates, and replace the tax subsidies for purchasing insurance on the exchanges with tax credits and incentives for health-savings accounts. It’s a plan favoring the better off.

    Meanwhile, President Trump has promised the impossible, “Health care that is far less expensive and far better.”

    Health care affects everyone. The debate about providing it has now stretched out for nearly a decade. It shows no signs of concluding anytime soon.

    Paul Choiniere is the editorial page editor.

    Comment threads are monitored for 48 hours after publication and then closed.