''Public option' is toothless; it's a waste of time to argue about it

The "public option," as it now stands in the bills before Congress, is no threat whatsoever to the private sector, according to the most recent report from the Congressional Budget Office.

It would be ironïc if the effort to debug the nation's health system dies over a misunderstanding of what the "public option" really is.

Based on the comments made in newspaper stories around the country, that misunderstanding is pervasive. Many Americans think it's a free-care program for poor and uninsured people, a health-care equivalent or the old welfare programs.  They think it would be another drain on the taxpayers.

They're operating on misinformation. Here's what the public plan now entails:

--Those who enroll in the public plan have to pay premiums on the same basis as all the other plans. 

--The public plan would get no government subsidies; it has to support itself through its premiums, just like the private plans.

--It has to negotiate rates with doctors and hospitals on the same basis as all the other plans.

--It's likely to do a poor job of managing care, according to CBO. If CBO is right, the premiums are likely to be higher than those of private-sector competitors.

--CBO projects that only 6 million of the newly covered Americans will choose the public option. One in five.

So the obsessive focus on the "public option" by both the left and the right is a ridiculous waste of time. 

--Carol Gentry, Editor, can be reached at 727-410-3266 or by e-mail.