So there have been a series of diaries assessing the new public option compromise floated, allowing States to opt out of the public option if they so choose.
Thereisnospoon has eloquently stated the case for.
Slinkerwink has eloquenly stated the case against.
However, I wonder if both sides are exaggerating the effect that opting out of the public option will have on health care offered to those in States that "opt out."
Many employees now work for large employers which operate in several states. Thus, a Company with employees in Alabama may also have employees in Rhode Island.
Let's say company XYZ employs half its work force in Rhode Island, and half in Alabama.
Let's further say, for sake of argument, that Alabama elects to opt-out, and Rhode Island doesn't.
The Rhode Island health insurance plans will have to compete with a public option, and therefore will offer better coverage for lower premiums. Company XYZ's Rhode Island employees will be able to choose from among those better plans (in addition to being able to choose the public option).
However, couldn't Company XYZ offer its Alabama employees the better plans that it offers its Rhode Island employees? Won't Alabama employees be OK if they work for national companies with large employee populations in states with the public option?
Or can't we at least design the proposed compromise legislation to make sure those employees have better, more affordable health care?
(It also could be that employees who work for large companies don't need the public option because their plans are considered "good enough" already, and the public option is for those who don't have access to affordable health care coverage through a large employer, in which case my question is largely academic).
I am not an expert, so comments from health care policy wonks would be most welcome.
Update [2009-10-8 15:20:7 by pontificator]: As some astute commentators have pointed out, I am probably wrong because health plans can't be sold across State lines. However, there are some interesting analyses in the comments about how the "opt out" compromise might help red staters in any event. For example, opt-out state health care companies might lower costs to keep their States from voting to opt back in to the public option.