But public options have the benefit of being simple and salient. Private actors and lobbyists are going to try to influence policy whether you advocate for a tax credit or a public option.

We think public options fare pretty well when it comes to withstanding capture.

First, let’s take the problem of capture. Ganesh Sitaraman and Anne Alstott: It’s a great question, and there are a couple of parts to it. Are there some cases where we need public monopolies pure and simple, because of network efficiencies or the tendency of private competitors to try to game the system? You mention this dynamic in the case of the post office, where private competitors persuaded Congress to limit the Postal Service's ability to innovate and we've seen how it also operates in the case of voucher and charter schools where some voucher schools find ways of sticking the public system with more-costly-to-educate students. What about the problem of political feedback loops, in which the private players recognize the risk that the public system will prove more cost-effective and attractive, and use their political power to game the rules to make the public option less competitive. R obert Kuttner: Your book is very astute at explaining that there are areas where both public and private options can and should be available, such as the post office versus FedEx and UPS, or both public schools and private ones, or public systems of health insurance versus private or supplemental ones. They discussed the book in email conversation with Prospect Co-Editor Robert Kuttner. Ganesh Sitaraman and Anne Alstott have co-authored an important new book, The Public Option: How to Expand Freedom, Increase Opportunity, and Promote Equality, making a powerful case for more public provision in several realms of economic and social policy.

Ganesh by Robert L. Brown