Editors of the Washington Examiner concede that the Graham-Cassidy health care legislation wouldn’t represent a clear victory for free-market principles. That’s not the issue.
The healthcare bill before the Senate today is not a full repeal of Obamacare. It is less than Republicans for seven years led voters to expect. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good in politics, which is, notoriously, the art of the possible.
The question before Republican senators and representatives instead is: Is it better than Obamacare? …
… What the bill needs to do is get America off its current path toward socialized healthcare and to create space for markets to work their magic.
This makes the case for incrementalism and demands that Republicans practice it wisely. …
… [I]f conservatives insist on a bill that is a free-enterprise ideal, they will get nothing. The Left and Democrats provide a good example here. They practice incrementalism. They want “single-payer healthcare” (a euphemism that omits that the single payer, and thus the sole decider, will be the federal government), but they take what they can get when they can get it. Obamacare itself was an incremental move, a conscious (if dishonest) step toward a socialist system of providing healthcare. But, to America’s great regret, Obamacare shows how effective incrementalism can be. There it is on the statute book, a great, nearly immovable impediment to freedom and economic growth, and it is the launching pad for a government takeover. Its authors knew this, and they accepted that the glass was half full, rather than complaining that the glass was half empty and walking away to sulk. It would help its author, Obama, get to where he wanted America to be.
In this spirit, Republicans need to be ready to reform as much of healthcare as they can, when they can.
