After a long arduous journey of being half-way there, the Senate finally passed a health care insurance reform bill on Christmas Eve.
How is it that throughout the entire health care debate the issue of job creation and economic stimulus has not been brought up?
The simple fact is, adding 30 million people into the health care system will translate into an abundance of economic activity and opportunity for millions of Americans: jobs such as doctors, nurses, technicians, administrators and new jobs in research, information technology, medicine — not to mention the positive impact all this fiscal solvency will have on supporting industries and professions.
Not to be a sidewalk superintendent, but it has been frustrating to see this law-making process unfold when obvious political messaging such as “Medicare for All” or “Health Care for New Jobs” has been missing from the Democratic playbook. Yes, I’m aware of Von Bismarck’s famous observation, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made,” but even so, does anyone else feel as if this campaign was waged with one arm tied behind our back?
Job creation and rebuilding our economy is the prevailing social issue of the day; it is a political Holy Grail and it makes me wonder why this aspect of health care reform has not been brought to light. Adding ten percent of the entire US population into a system of continuous preventive care will undoubtedly lead to job and infrastructure growth in an industry that definitively embodies the best way to improve the general welfare of our national family.
In short, a trillion dollar ten-year health care reform package serves double purpose — not only does it begin to take the steps necessary to provide accessible and affordable health care for everyone, but it also acts as a massive jobs program and stimulus to uplift an economy struggling to recover.
It is beyond me why these two political dots have not been connected; they are so interrelated, and it seems that emphasizing the economic benefits of health care reform would have had a favorable impact by bringing many of the vocal naysayers — at least — into a place of neutrality; it may have even brought in a few Republicans to do the unthinkable, vote “yes”.