No one denies that, in an affluent country like our own, it borders tragic that millions do not have some form of health care. I feel for those Americans – I really do. I agree that health care reform is badly needed in America, but I don’t believe the bill of goods called “universal health care” that is presently being pitched by our president contains the solution. In fact, I believe it is bad medicine for America.
1. Universal health care is being unwisely rushed.
Should sweeping health care reform be enacted in world-record times? Just like they did with the stimulus packages and bogus bailout boloney, Obamacare is being shoved down America’s throat (without explanation) and propelled like a ramrod through Congress (without examination). I call it the Obama’s blitzkrieg: create crisis, crunch numbers and cram legislation. The fact is, the president continues to sell the program, but there is still no single plan he or Congress is ready to sell.
I finally agree with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., when he delivered the official pronouncement that the Senate would not be passing a bill by the president’s deadline of Aug. 1. He said, “It’s better to have a product based on quality and thoughtfulness rather than try to jam something through.” Hey – there’s a new concept! “Quality and thoughtfulness” instead of crisis and crunch! Shouldn’t our president already be leading by such rationale?
Speak of timing, I keep asking myself, is this even really the economic season in which to enact universal health care and rain down its costs upon America’s taxpayers? We are repeatedly being told that we are in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, yet the president and leaders continue to spend money like America is at the top of its game. Is that what you do when you are facing unprecedented difficult financial hardships – spend enormous amounts?
2. Universal health care will clearly drive our country deeper into debt, which is being progressively purchased by foreign powers without any concern by Washington to stop it.
Obama said in his nationally televised press conference, health care reform is not going to add to that deficit, it’s designed to lower it.” How can he even say that when they haven’t even settled on a single health care plan? When he doesn’t know the far-reaching implications of offering it in every community across the nation?
Do Americans actually believe the president when he says health care is now critical to economic recovery? What a genius sales technique! Government programs are now deficit control measures! Are people really buying this shtick?
The president is struggling to base his rhetoric in fiscal reality. Even according to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate version of the health care legislation “would result in a net increase in federal deficits of about $1.0 trillion for fiscal years 2010 through 2019.” Is that what you call good fiscal responsibility within an economy and government that is already bordering on bankruptcy?
We’re also being told that there will be no added or hidden costs to a universal health care program, yet how does our government expect to provide medical coverage for 47 million extra Americans without adding a plethora of new medical and administrative personnel, equipment and facilities? And who is going to pay for those? (The answer is obvious: all of us. It will start with the wealthy, but it will trickle down to everyone else – every government plan and program does.)
I couldn’t say it any better than our president said during his press conference: “And the feeling is, all right, we had the bank bailout, we had the recovery package, we had the supplemental, we’ve got the budget, we’re seeing numbers – trillions here and trillions there. And so I think legitimately people are saying, look, we’re in a recession, I’m cutting back, I’m having to give up things – and yet all I see is government spending more and more money. And that argument I think has been used effectively by people who don’t want to change health care to suggest that somehow this is one more government program.” Exactly, Mr. President!
3. Universal health care will impersonalize health care and ration medical services.
Do we really believe government running health care will provide for more and better personal care and options? Since when has the government ever taken over anything and it proven better for the American people? According to The Lewin Group, a prominent, politically neutral health care analysis firm, 83.4 million will lose their private health insurance, if the government offers their version. That’s nearly one-third of America! And will they assume that government-directed care will result in better care? More personal health care options?
Government takeover of health care will also allow Washington to use “comparative effectiveness research” to dictate to doctors which treatments they should prescribe and how much they should cost. That, in turn will lead to rationing of health care services.
Canada and Europe have already proven that national health care translates into national nightmares, with a plethora of new government regulations and new systems of rationing medical attention. Under government-run services, personal health care will transform into more impersonal harassment. More government means more menacing minutiae running our lives.
4. Universal health care will ultimately limit the competitive market of health care.
You don’t create competitive markets by monopolies, yet that is exactly what government-run universal health care would prevent: competition. If government should do anything, it should crack down on medical insurance monopolies. If they want to regulate one more thing, then better regulate the medical insurance companies and not the American people.
And what about for the taxpayers who are paying for the program? Will having universal health care encourage their future productivity? To tax the upper class (which means to penalize their productivity) is certainly not an incentive for American’s chasing the American dream. And their added taxes will obviously trickle down as well to consumers. Or do we just assume they’re going to pay 47 million Americans’ universal health care out of their surpluses?
Some conservatives say, “Do nothing.” But I don’t believe government should do nothing – I just believe it should do something different. And right now they’re in their normal spend-more create-more government-bureaucracy mode.
5. Universal health care will ultimately transform legislators into quasi-health care practitioners.
This is perhaps one of the most overlooked consequences of universal health care. With government-sanctioned universal health care, legislators will ultimately become quasi-medical practitioners because they will lead and guide the government-controlled medical boards, personnel and policies that are overseeing the program. This will include abortive and end-of-life counsel and services. Federal politicians will rely upon relatively few chief physicians (appointed by them), who will in turn oversee and implement the medical policies and procedures they feel best for the country. If you thought special interests captivated the souls of politicians now, wait until universal health care gives politicians greater sway over the medical community. The nanny state is not our solution to better health!
6. Universal health care increases big government and continues America on the slippery slope toward socialism.
Our government already provides two medical coverage programs via Medicare (for senior citizens) and Medicaid (for low-income citizens).
The president mentioned in his speech last week that these two programs are the single greatest contributors to a skyrocketing deficit. So why not reform, improve and enhance these programs, rather than create a third (or fourth or fifth) government medical bureaucracy called “universal health care”? I’m for health care reform, but why don’t we start with what we have? Despite rhetoric, reform isn’t what any of the at least four 1,000+ page versions in Washington have in mind.
What is needed in Washington is a truly bipartisan group that is allowed ample amount of time to work on a compromise health care program that doesn’t raise taxes (for anyone), regulate personal medical choices or ration health care.
I believe other solutions should be explored as well: like local communities rallying around those who are without medical care and coming up with their own local solutions, and equipping people without health care to better manage their lives so they can contribute to their own wellbeing.
The so-called health care crisis in America is about more than just providing health care. It’s about prevention, too. It’s also about individuals learning to conquer the consumption war and do better to take care of their minds, bodies and souls – their holistic health.
Our founders created a government whose duty was primarily to protect – not provide for – Americans. They created the framework of freedom through which all Americans could experience “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” They didn’t put a plan in place to provide for every American’s welfare and wellbeing. Their health care plan was simple: Take care of your health. And though they certainly could have used our medical advances today, they experienced “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” even without universal health care.
Why wait? Check out National Action Against Obesity and see what advice it has for you and your loved ones. And go to Parents United Now to learn more about how you and your local community can reform health care and keep your options for doctors and medical care. And mostly, go to Defend Your Health Care, the website of Dr. Betsy McCaughey, a health policy expert and former lieutenant governor of New York who has actually read the entire Senate bill on universal health care and is disclosing many hidden details within it that are not being discussed with the American public.