Health Care Reform

Response to Bi-partisan health care reform written by Harold Nelson in the Vinton Eagle dated 17 July, 2009

Let’s be honest, with a super majority in the Senate the Democrats can pass any piece of legislation that they wish. The problem lies herein, if they pass something without one Republican on board and it is an utter failure, as universal health care would be, they will have to take all of the blame and thus, will be voted out next election cycle.

I think that most would agree that parts of the health care system need fixed. However, there are much better ways to fix the system than to have the government become even more intrusive in our lives, mandate, and portion out our health care. The government needs to regulate insurance companies and ensure that frivolous lawsuits against doctors and hospitals are dealt with accordingly. Additionally, the government needs to ensure that prices are regulated; prices are just too high. Look at the Canadian system if you want to see what ours will look like, since it is modeled after their system. Waiting for a year for an MRI to see if you need hip replacement surgery and not given any pain medication for the pain in the meantime, waiting 6 months to see a specialist when you have brain cancer, not being able to have certain medicines even available to you and not being able to test new medications on people with terminal illnesses, even with their consent. And there are countless other horror stories. Many of those people come to the United States, the country with the best health care in the world, to get their health care. Just a few months ago the different provinces in Canada now have private hospitals where you can be seen without standing in long lines.

Dr. Rand Paul stated that one-third of the uninsured make more than $50,000 a year. one-third are eligible for Medicade but cannot figure out how to apply, about 20% are not American citizens, and many are just in-between plans. So would you like to add almost 50 million people to the health care system without adding new doctors?

I do agree with you that most of our incumbent politicians are corrupt; the only thing that they are worried about is being elected in the next election. I say to vote all of them out and to find ones, no matter the party who stand for the principles that our Founding Fathers did and the ones that are for term limits. I do however, disagree that we should provide health care is a right, just as Social Security and Medicare are entitlements. The latter two programs have been ran so well by the government it is amazing to me that you would even mention them to bolster your position on government-provided health care. Social Security is bankrupt, has been for decades. This entitlement needs to go away a discussion left for yet another time. Medicare is broken and needs fixed; a system in which one can be a multi-millionaire and age 65 and still get coverage.

“Polls show that the majority of people want government-provided health care [and] government-provided education?” I do love it when people spew their opinions and do not put sources: July 10-11 Rasmussen poll shows that 49% oppose and 46% approve of government-provided health care. My math teacher told me that 49 is more than 46, just sayin’. July 17 Rasmussen poll shows that 78% show that it is somewhat likely that taxes will be raised on the middle class to pay for health care reform and 56% say that it is very likely. The latest poll for public education taken was on Aug 12-13, 2003, American with children living at home 41% say public education is the best while 47% say that public education is the worst. Hummm, when the facts are stated instead of one’s opinion things actually come into light, don’t they?

Can we afford government-provided health care for everyone? No. I agree with Mr. Nelson who stated that we need to impose price controls on medical providers, get rid of administrative duplication, and take back money that was given to investment houses and big banks, but not to put that on health care. This administration has spent more money in 3 months, yes the Bush administration started it and I was opposed to that as well, than the Bush administration spent in 8 years, according to moneymorning.com. I am not, however, prepared to cut defense spending at all; after all, there is a war on terror going on, just in case you have forgotten 9/11.