By Nick Anderson, Houston Chronicle

Young people are worried. We have a future ahead of us that is overshadowed with a troubled economy, no jobs, no health insurance, possibly no social security, and a society that is addicted to destructive fossil fuels. We’re focused on Congress as they debate our future in health care, clean energy and green jobs.  But so far, after seeing the weakened Waxman-Markey bill and the draft health care reform bill leaked from the Senate Finance Committee today, it seems that both attempts to address these serious crises – climate change, the need for green jobs, our broken health care system – are simply “better than nothing” proposals.  As Igor Volsky and Ezra Klein pointed out in regards to the draft health care reform legislation:

I think Ezra Klein is right to argue that the leaked version of the Senate Finance Committee’s health reform legislation is somewhat of a nothing-burger. It’s not well done, it’s not rare, it’s just medium well.

Individuals and families up to 300% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL) would receive tax credits to cover the cost of coverage and small businesses would be eligible for a temporary small business tax credit. Again, the subsidies aren’t great, but they’re better than nothing.

That’s it?! Better than nothing?? Don’t we deserve better than that?

Nothing is what some of these proposals seem to offer. The most significant omission in the leaked health care reform legislation from the Senate Finance Committee is the absence of the public option. In its place is the co-op proposal, introduced by Senator Conrad (D- N.Dakota).  Mother Jones does a good job of summing up the ugly compromise:

What is in the Finance Committee’s draft, and slated for further discussion, is a scheme for health care “co-ops” that would pool individuals and businesses together into consumer co-operatives to purchase health insurance and services. (Kaiser Health News has profiled one existing co-op in Seattle.)   Baucus [Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee] has been talking out of both sides of his mouth on the public plan for some time, and seemed to quickly latch onto the co-op idea as means to having it both ways.

Co-ops are a weak alternative to the public plan and have been tried before, after the Great Depression, and failed.

We can’t afford weak alternatives. Congress should be writing the strongest proposals possible, but are instead releasing watered-down bills, drenched in industry money and influence, and all we can say is “well it’s better than nothing.”  This is unacceptable. Our futures deserve better. For example, why not single-payer health care? Yes, Campus Progress, along with many other health care reform supporters, has been advocating for the public health insurance option that will provide quality, affordable health care for all.  However, if single-payer health care were on the table it would be the more progressive plan to fight for.

So why isn’t single-payer health care on the table?  Well to start, Conservatives are painting this option as “socialized medicine” or “government take-over”.  And the insurance industry strongly opposes the plan because it would mean the end of their glory days.  But let’s get one thing straight, single-payer health care is NOT socialized medicine.  I liked the Daily Kos explanation of the major differences between the two terms that are getting, conveniently for those opposing it, tossed into the same boat too frequently:

Socialized medicine is a system in which the government owns the means of providing medicine. Single-payer health care is not socialized medicine. It’s a system in which one institution purchases all, or in reality, most, of the care. But the payer does not own the doctors or the hospitals or the nurses or the MRI scanners. Medicare is an example of a mostly single-payer system, as is France.

So if we just understood the difference between the two and made sure Congress knew that we demanded single-payer health care, could it be an option? Would it actually get passed? The answer, unfortunately, is not likely.  Even Obama rejects the idea, but for less selfish reasons than the industry:

“If I were starting a system from scratch, then I think that the idea of moving towards a single-payer system could very well make sense,” Obama said in response to the questioner in New Mexico, echoing comments he made during his presidential campaign. “The only problem is that we’re not starting from scratch. . . . We don’t want a huge disruption as we go into health-care reform where suddenly we’re trying to completely reinvent one-sixth of the economy.”

It just seems that there is no chance for single-payer health care to pass through Congress because it is too radical of a change.  So, if we have to take incremental steps to get there, so be it. But we will not settle for “better than nothing” alternatives.

Call your Senators today and demand a stronger health care bill, with NO Co-ops, NO Triggers, and NO “better than nothing” compromises!