- The Washington Times - Friday, April 10, 2009


While criticizing the prospects of implementing a public health care initiative and the possible dismantling of private-sector plans, Tony Blankley insinuates that a public-private partnership is, without saying so explicitly, essentially a form of socialized medicine and therefore bad (“Obama's prescription,” Opinion, Tuesday). Pundits and critics raise the specter of socialized medicine to demean and defeat any government-led health initiative.

In reality, a public-private partnership would indicate socialized insurance. After all, doctors still would be employed by privately owned hospitals. Accordingly, compensation for doctors would not wane to the degree that Mr. Blankley suggests, as compensation still would be determined by an “unfettered market” instead of government fetters.

While a public-private partnership will require sacrifices from all parties involved, let's not get carried away with false accusations and assumptions that such a partnership somehow would smack of socialized medicine.



Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide