Bruce, the problem is the "within reason" part. The way it works in real life is neither party can dominate on its own... so they both go after the independents by whatever means (primarily making the other guy look bad).
Problem is, as soon as one party (I don't care which) becomes dominant, all the moderation goes out the door - they see it as a free pass to go through their Christmas list. That's what's happening with the Dems right now. Fortunately, it's self correcting.
I was listening to NPR the other day, and some special interest group rep was on there yapping about lowering cost of healthcare. They were lobbying for lower the cost to low income families - surely a noble cause - but NOT ONCE did she mention even ONE way to actually lower any costs - the entire speech was for lowering the "cost" to her special interest - i.e. make someone else pay for it.
That's the kind of crap that infuriates me - they're not trying to solve the problem. Just ram social agenda (dem or pub) down my throat.
I guarantee you nobody will disagree with these 2 items:
1- Allow individuals to buy insurance at the same terms as businesses (through an exchange or whatever)
2- Remove pre-existing conditions limitations.
Do NOTHING else, but pass those 2 laws. Let the market work out the rest. I'm certain if you limit it to those 2 issues, there will be a bi-partisan bill.
These won't reduce cost of healthcare, but remove 2 huge obstacles for small businesses and the self employed - supposedly a substantial part of our economic engine.
As for ACTUAL cost reductions, I'm not sure there is any proposal that does anything useful... it's all pitting insurance against hospital against doctors against patients... zero sum game. We need alot of pilots by different states to come up with something that's good and follow that I guess. Apparently the Mass solution wasn't that great