Un-Liberaled Woman

In case you missed my first post on this, here it is…

Nowadays the term “healthcare reform” is like the new black of a fashion catwalk. People name drop it like they’re scared it’s going out of style and two-thirds of people can’t even explain why their advocating it. Here’s a question I pose to people when they jump on the universal healthcare soapbox – Name one federally-funded socialized service that either doesn’t operate in a deficit year after year OR can compete with its private counterpart. Cat got your tongue? If the current services government provides are operating in debt, don’t provide proper customer service, and aren’t equally productive to the private sector, then it has no business insisting to put our healthcare under a vice of bureaucratic red tape.

We want to make sure everyone has the freedom of opportunity to get long-term, high-quality healthcare but also that they have the freedom of choice in their physician or treatment. Under the current, regulation-constricted system this is not happening, but unfortunately under a NHS run by the government this won’t happen either. People talk about insurance companies dictating healthcare but then advocate a governmental system will do better. The model for an improved healthcare industry is there – our government should be turning to successful industry for guidance like cell phones, auto insurance and elective medical surgery industries. Competition in these free-market industries have created the environment for innovation, higher quality service and lower prices. Isn’t this what we want for healthcare today?

Over the last year we’ve heard criticism about our current healthcare system and skewed statistics as a basis for reform. While the system does have flaws, they are not for the reasons you hear touted by the media like they’re on a deadline to beat a dead horse. First is the “47 million” talking point most of you have heard about. The same 47 million figure that includes 12.6 million illegal immigrants. Non-citizens of this country should not be dictating government legislation that is funded on the backs of legal citizens paying for it out of their own pockets. Also, of that “uninsured” figure are 20% who make more than $75,000 a year. Clearly these are people who can afford insurance. A final nail in the validity coffin of this figure is that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) stated, in their 2003 report, 50% of the uninsured actually acquire insurance with 4 months. The main cause of this is job transitions which in are a direct result of the government regulation forcing employer-based insurance, thus not allowing for the medical insurance industry to be a true free market.

Right now, the federal government is funded by about $1.1 trillion in income tax revenues annually. The estimates for the reform proposed by the Obama Administration is around $4 trillion. These figures indicate that your income taxes will be affected – whether directly in your paycheck or indirectly through the reduction in salary, raises, benefits and jobs. And if you elect to stay with your private insurance, why should you pay twice to fund the public option? If we’re not willing to be taxed more for this “free” public healthcare, the other reality is services rationing in order to keep costs down. In NHS countries, like Britain, people on average wait six months to see a doctor about a serious medical condition. There are documented cases of young women dying from ovarian cancer because the government ordered a rationing of pap smears that would have otherwise caught the cancer in early, treatable stages. In Canada, people either go to court fighting for their right to medical care, or catch the next bus crossing the border to get it in the US. Where will we go when our healthcare is rationed under a government run system? China? Mexico?

Don’t forget about the customer service of healthcare. Are ER waiting rooms going to remove clocks like the post office so that people, not the government employees providing the service, can focus on why they’re there? Are we going to have to resort to volunteer doctors like our firefighters because we have to ration the costs? And will all our advances in prescription medicine go down in quality and development time? 96% of all drugs on the market come from the private sector because companies use their profits to fuel research and development. How can we expect the same advances under a government system which has never produced one single year of profit?

The current medical care programs government provides are not promising for what our future would hold under universal healthcare. In military hospitals women have been forced to share ultrasound rooms. Medicaid has always operated in debt and Medicare is scheduled to go bankrupt in 2019. In business, we base estimates of potential performance on historical data. What does this track record predict for us, and, more importantly, are we willing to risk our health on the premise of skewed statistics and empty promises? Since 86% of people are satisfied with their current insurance plan and healthcare service, is it justified to overhaul the entire system risking quality of care at double the costs to taxpayers?

A private solution to reform is possible. People, not government, need to be put in charge of their health. When’s the last time you shopped around for a deal on your medical physical or dental cleanings? But we all shop around when it comes to getting a new cell phone or carrier. We want to make sure we have the very best at the most cost-efficient price point. That prospect of choice forces companies to meet our demands as consumers. The positive returns are endless if 300 million citizens were freed from the government-mandated employer-based insurance. Then a real, free market for insurance and health services would be flooded with competition, leaving our health and our wallets to reap the benefits.

The post above is an excerpt from a column I have with another writer: Talking and Tackling (TNT) – The Issues. I’ll be linking to that blog here in the next few days. But in the meantime, I’ll be posting my parts of the column on the issues we’ll be tackling through friendly debates. I’ll then link to the column’s blog where you can read more articles and the other side of the debated issues.