Governor Christie caved in to ideology and is pandering to Romney to get the VP spot in the republican national ticket. In fact, New Jersey should have the healthcare Exchange, with a good public option in it, even if ACA is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. A conditional veto, sending the bill back to the legislature with modifications was in order.
Yet, the democratic bill has defects. That is why I suggest the conditional veto with modifications as the best avenue to follow: Why a paid board as the democrat- tailored bill proposes? That is another nest for patronage jobs. Then, if the state becomes the arbiter deciding what private plans are admitted in the exchange, lawsuits will fly. Lawsuits are costly.
Christie has used the excuses the democrats gave him to torpedo a good idea. That is how the two parties play with New Jersey.
But one of the objections of Christie is senseless: The Exchange and the Medicare-like expansion have no relation other than both being part of ACA. We have the choice of having one without the other – or adopting both – if ACA is overturned.
Furthermore, the Exchange has nothing to do with ACA’s mandate to buy insurance – the main point of contention in the USSC. I myself am not comfortable with such mandate. But I repeat, the Exchange has no impact on the mandate issue nor the mandate has an effect on the usefulness of the Exchange.
The virtual Exchange I foresee is just a website where all the private plans and policies available are included, together with a cost-neutral public option, and all are compared objectively according to cost, value, and any other applicable parameters. The existence of the Exchange would make the selection of health coverage easier for individuals and businesses alike.
That is the type of Exchange I envision: A virtual market for health services for New Jersey in the XXI Century without a bureaucracy behind it.