Obama’s “Co-operative” Trojan Horse

With the public voicing overwhelming concern over the potential effects Obama’s “public option” could have on America’s healthcare industry, the White House now has its back against the wall. Progressives in Congress threaten mutiny against any bill that fails to include the provision and the far-left blogosphere is not pleased with this perceived concession. Obama’s solution? Simply repackage the government-run program and call it a “co-operative” in an attempt to deceive the American public.

On Sunday, Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, said that the public option was “not the essential element” of healthcare reform and the Administration would carefully consider a government-chartered “co-operative” before flip-flopping on the issue during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union.

While everyone typically enjoys the notion of cooperation, do not be fooled. A true cooperative program is governed by the enrollees of the plan, not the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Washington bureaucrats.

Here is a commentary from Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner on the fallacy of “co-operative” healthcare, while Michael Cannon from Cato weighed in on the issue in a TownHall.com piece.

Meanwhile, here at the Commonwealth Foundation, the noted economist and former presidential adviser, Dr. Arthur Laffer, and a team of researchers have put together a new policy report on the harm ObamaCare would bring tor Pennsylvania.