Sharpening Ned Lamont's Pencil, part 1
Ned Lamont didn't actually answer the (interesting) third of six questions set by Ghengis Conn (that has to be one of the coolest nom's de bloggue in East Blogistan). He was asked "Canada or something different". His answer ran to 152 words without a "yes" or "no". What he did say was "affordable universal coverage", which is the existing system for employer-based "benefits", with HMOs and insurance companies like Aetna running the core cost centers. It is the system that has over 10% annual cost growth, and now accounts for 12% of the economy.
It is understandable coming from a Connecticut-based CEO in the campus cable franchise industry (dba Campus Televideo), and more recently in the planned development (residential gated communities) private wiring franchise industry (dba Gatehouse Networks). Insurance is the golden calf in Connecticut, and wages and benefits are the tunable knobs on the capital-labor interface, and privately held, venture capitalist dominated executive teams don't answer to shareholders or unions.
But there is no substantive difference between Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman on health care reform. There is the stylistic difference of Lieberman being in the pockets of the Connecticut insurance companies, but not getting bribed by Cigna to front for Cigna's bottom line is a piss poor differentiator.
We're sympathetic to the problem. Maine Dems can't quite get their heads around MBNA, and in truth, Mainers don't declare bankruptcy, so both Snowe and Collins have no exposure on predatory practices in the retail credit segment of the finance sector.
But Ned Lamont could be for single payer. Canada burns 6% to provide 100% coverage and has months long waits for elective surgery. The US burns 12% and has 40 million uninsured and as many under-insured, and management and unions are both on eroding ground.
Its not as if the deep pockets of the Connecticut insurance companies are going to shower gold on a challenger to an already ingratiated incumbent. Their money will come when Lamont has already beaten Lieberman. Until that point in time, it makes no sense not to run against a system that can't be fixed, but is wildly profitable.
We don't expect our phone to ring off the hook because the message that Sherry Brown, MB's boss in the C/G '92 and "a vicious, heartless, and very competent operative - god help Lamont if she should head up the campaign", has been heard by Tom Swan. But Lamont's pencil needs sharpening.