The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Defending Frum

Text Size

Robert Stacy McCain took issue with David Frum's blog post arguing that defeating Obamacare may prove a pyrrhic victory for conservatives, but I actually mostly agree with what Frum wrote in this case. Just take a deep breath and give me a moment to explain. As I have written repeatedly, conservatives should not be defenders of the status quo, because we do not have a free market health care system in this country. Nearly half of health care spending is already done by the government through entitlement programs that are bankrupting us at the state and federal level, and what's left of the private market is controlled by bad government policies. We have a tax code that discriminates against those who purchase insurance on their own rather than through their employer, which makes it impossible for somebody to take their health insurance with them from job to job and drives up costs because people always have the perception that somebody is else is picking up the tab. And those who do purchase health care on their own must navigate a highly-regulated individual insurance market in which they don't have the freedom to purchase the amount of insurance coverage they want, because states mandate how many benefits insurers must offer.

So, while it's encouraging to see the backlash against Obamacare, it's easy to see how many of the same arguments can be turned against any future effort to pass free market reforms of the health care system. If Obama, with the full backing of AARP, can't touch Medicare without getting scorched by seniors worried about losing coverage, then it's difficult to see older Americans digesting conservative entitlement reform proposals. If Democrats have had to shelve even tinkering with the employer-based health system, both because of bad polling and union opposition, then its hard to see how conservatives could successfully argue that we need to move away from it. And if conservatives have gained traction by noting that Obama's health care proposals will cause people to lose their current coverage, the argument could be turned around because transitioning to a free market system -- while, in my view, much better in the long-run -- would have to disrupt the employer system in a way that would likely result in some people losing current coverage. Now, as I said at the outset, I "mostly agree" with Frum, but not entirely. While watching this health care battle unfold demonstrates how difficult it would be to pass free market reforms, the passage of Obamacare would actually make real reform impossible. If we lose this battle we'll have a massive new entitlement in place that we won't be able to do away with and it really will be the coup de grace to limited government conservatism. I'd prefer to have a fighting chance.

View all comments (15) | Leave a comment

JP| 8.9.09 @ 11:47AM

Phillip,
You do have a point, but you are mixing apples and oranges. Medicare will go bankrupt no matter what Obama does. According to the board of trustees, it is due to be insolvent by 2017.

The current fight is a tactical one with strategic implications. Frum is fooling himself if he thinks the GOP can in the middle of this fight offer up any alternatives. For the record, the AARP is quickly showing its ture colors by ignoring its constituents (the seniors) and just acting like another arm of the Democratic Party. The AARP is currently undermining its own credability. The GOP does offer alternatives, but currently the GOP is too small, too fractured, and is expending its energies just surviving. When you take in to account the RINOs, it is obvious the GOP cannot currently offer up alternatives with a united front. All it can do now is make sure ObamaCare doesn't become reality.

The President and his Congressional leaders have taken partisanship to new levels. And currently, the GOP would be foolish to attempt "a bi-partisan" agreement with them. Obama and his minions want the public option (or at least the framework for one) something fierce. The dangers of a bait and switch are real. It would be wise for the GOP to fight one battle at a time. Stopping ObamaCare in its tracks, and waiting for a pick up of Congrressional seats seems to be the best way. Charles Kruathammer has some excellent ideas how a future compromise in Health Care could be crafted, but the GOP will have to be in a much much stronger postion to do it.

Medicare, of course will be reformed whether we like it or not. The system is about to implode as millions of Boomers enter in to it, and there isn't enough workers earning enough money to fund it. If one takes into account the demographics, and the near term underperformance of our economy, Americans will be foreced to make some difficult decisions. The Seniors can bitch and make demands all they want, but we can't extract blood from a turnip

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.9.09 @ 11:56AM

Mr. Klein, thank you.

I have been quietly trying to say "conserving what we have" is not the answer.

We must de-construct a lot of big government bull corn and corruption such as in Medicare.

Sadly, it seems that the worse things get, the more we can accomplish in that regard.

I am part of a movement to get a whole bunch of congress critters fired in 2010.
OKOK it is just a start. (smile)

We will represent some 10 million "small" business owners/officers/professionals...many of whom are also veterans.

We have linked to your thoughts:

">>Most of us have employees who count on us every day to make decent, rational, decisions. Those employees have thrown in their lot with us, hoping that we can navigate the rapids of our world.

(We found each other due to the splendid people at "The American Spectator". They allow free comments upon the articles they write.)

WE must do three things.
1. We must inform ourselves as to the issues of the day. We T.E.A.M. organizers can find no better sources than these four:
(Please put these sites in your favorites.)
http://www.americanthinker.com/ http://spectator.org/
http://www.nationalreview.com/ http://www.heritage.org/about/

Mr. Klein, we are responsible "small" business people...providing seventy percent of the jobs in America. We and our loyal employees are simply fed up.
Thank you again.

Teflon93| 8.9.09 @ 12:37PM

And do you believe that the change Frum seeks is the elimination of 3rd party payment and true free market (that is, largely unregulated) healthcare?

BD57| 8.9.09 @ 4:26PM

Better a "pyrrhic victory" than a real defeat.

Aaron| 8.9.09 @ 4:33PM

You titled your post "Defending Frum". Wow.

kingsmill| 8.9.09 @ 5:27PM

Thank goodness Klein and Frum aren't elected officials and Sen DeMint is. These two me-too "conservatives" would be rolled by Obama on a daily basis. Has the word "purge" been totally discredited after communism, because the movement needs a good housecleaning.

kingsmill| 8.9.09 @ 5:28PM

Dixie Pixie| 8.9.09 @ 5:50PM

Why so glum, Frum.
Obama lost the health care debate when his minions had to explain why they were trying to snuff granny to save money.
Besides what is wrong with defending the status quo. The status quo comes with a considerable built-in political base. Not only that, the status quo base will defend its current position feverishly. Why not turn Health Care into the Democrats “third rail”. The conservatives would be in a worse position if they try to tinker with current system without popular support.

Granny| 8.9.09 @ 9:06PM

This debate certainly has the attention of all Americans. No one is on the sidelines. They are either pro-government takeover or pro-freedom.

Roy| 8.10.09 @ 12:17AM

Re: problems:

I actually agree that conservatives are never going to be able to reform Medicare. At root, it consists of the old taking money from the young, and the old know where the polling places are whereas the young have no clue.

On the other hand, the argument that this has just entrenched emplyer health care even more is a bit weak. There is a difference between losing your employer health care, but you get $5,000 in your pocket and your employer has more money to give you a raise, and losing your employer health care so that you can get dumped on the welfare option.

Mladen| 8.10.09 @ 10:01AM

Free market in health care? Does it mean you would allow foreign competitors in USA market. After all, if you cannot afford expensive medical procedures (like coronary bypass) made by US personnel, you might have better chance with one done by Cubans or Chinese then without any at all. Ditto for medicines... buy generics. But whole idea that sick people have to fight with some health insurance scribe over payments of essential medical procedures makes me sick.

Teflon93| 8.10.09 @ 10:06AM

If you don't like fighting with your insurance company you can find another.

Where do you go when you're tired of fighting with an Autocrat apparatchik at the Department of No?

Art| 8.10.09 @ 10:52AM

Hey Teflon, do you think this will eliminate private insurance? When you want ADDITIONAL care you take out a supplemental private insurance plan. The the private insurers will actually be able perform a service rather than deny one.

Teflon93| 8.10.09 @ 11:48AM

Yes, it will eliminate private insurance.

Read p. 16 of the bill.

Phaedrusnyc| 8.11.09 @ 1:17PM

@Teflon
Really? If you don't like fighting with your insurance company you can find another? Find me a few examples of affordable insurance companies that accept people with pre-existing conditions (such as the ones one would be fighting with his insurance company over) and I'll find you a genuine jackalope.