Health Care Reform a Casualty of Ideology

So once again, we are witnessing the spectacle of two parties who couldn't govern their ways out of a cardboard box. The Democrats are putting forward a plan that doesn't fix our health care system, as much as it simply reinvents it. Into what exactly? No one really knows, and the Democratic leadership doesn't really seem to care. As Democratic Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania said recently "anything is better than the current system." Really? Anything? Try telling that to the 86% of Americans who say they are happy with their current health care plan, according to a July, 2009 Time Magazine poll. Try selling the unknown consequences of a healthcare system managed by the same brainiacs that brought us the tirelessly accountable United States Postal Service, the always friendly and efficient Internal Revenue Service, and who can forget FEMA's wonderful performance during Hurricane Katrina.

This year alone, the Federal Government managed to send millions of dollars in stimulus money to 4,000 convicted felons, some even rapists and murderers, and once again the Department of Health and Human Services will not have enough vaccines to combat the flu this season, this time, the deadly H1N1. Try selling government bureaucracy to the majority of Americans (49% to 34%), who are "strongly opposed" to the current plan being discussed in congress, according to a August 13, 2009 Opinion Dynamics Poll. That poll also shows that 88% of Americans would choose to receive medical care in the U.S. rather than Canada if there were seriously ill. Canada's health care system is often compared to what the U.S. would have if the Democrats have their way. This shows how out of touch Rendell and many in his party are on this issue. His statement that "anything would be better than the current system" is akin to saying that any car would be better than a new BMW 7 Series with a flat, simply because it needed a new tire.

Does he really believe ANYTHING would be better than our current system??? What if their system turns out to be the Yugo of health care systems? Would that be better than what we have now, simply because it falls under the guise of "anything"? These guys and gals are willing to scrap a system that works well for 90% of the country so that 10% are provided coverage. Those are the kind of math skills that got Democrats in trouble in the years before Clinton and his balanced budgets and welfare reform. It's hard to imagine that they haven't learned anything from that experience and yet are somehow back in the majority. Its surprising until you look at the nothingness being put forward by the opposition.

While Republicans are fully entitled to complain about the Democrat's bill, that entitlement comes with the caveat that they put their money where their mouth is. If they don't like it, they need to put forward their own bill. Has that happened? No. Instead, they recently put forward a "Seniors Bill of Rights", that Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele calls a "placeholder" until a full health care bill is written and submitted to congress "sometime in the Fall." Sometime in the Fall??? Seniors Bill of Rights? Again, I refer you back to my "cardboard box" analogy. The Republicans also had 6 years under Bush where they controlled congress. They could've gotten this done if they wanted, but they didn't.

So, what's the solution? It's so simple, that even congress should be able to figure it out, and yet, here we are. The Democrat's main goals are to lower costs, eliminate pre-existing conditions, and cover the roughly 10% of Americans (closer to 6% when you remove undocumented immigrants, and those who simply choose not to participate in plan) who don't currently have access to health care. Republicans want to lower costs, increase competition, and keep the "public option" limited to our northern neighbor, and those "lefties" in Europe.

Simply put, we should keep what works, and fix what doesn't. If 90% of the country is happy with their plan they should be able to keep it. The government should work with the insurance companies to fix some of the problems associated with waste and out of control costs, and it should mandate that all clients be covered regardless of pre-existing conditions. They should set standards and regulate the system, but they don't need to actually be the system. The government doesn't need to create a car company to enforce safety, fuel economy, and emissions standards. The government doesn't need to build houses to make sure costs are kept down, and that they're earthquake safe. So why is the public option the only solution Democrats have to keeping costs down, and regulating their practices? I'm fairly certain insurance companies will be willing to deal with more regulation, and cost reductions because the alternative of a public option would put most of them out of business, and leave the surviving companies a fraction of their original size.

Much needed legislation to reduce fraudulent lawsuits should be part of this bill, as well as the ability for consumers and companies to cross-shop health care plans being offered in other states to help increase competition, and in turn improve quality and reduce costs.

Lastly, cover the 10-15% who currently don't have health insurance, but not through a public, government-run option. The government can simply put a bid out to the insurance companies (just like they do for purchasing vehicles, weapons systems, etc), and whoever offers the best coverage for the lowest amount gets the bid. If this health plan ends up costing $4,000 a year, people could be given a choice of either taking that plan, or get a $4,000 credit towards the health insurance plan of their choice. Every person who is not working, on disability, or unemployment, will be covered by this plan. This should incentivize employers who are currently offering health insurance, to continue offering it, and ostensibly leave only the remaining 10-15% of Americans on taxpayer funded health insurance.

Both sides would get what's most important to them, and the American people would be the winners. It's now up to the parties and the politicians to put aside their idealogies and finally get it done.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1913426,00.html

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/4018754-stimulus-dollars-find-their-way-to-rapists-and-murders

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/16/auto-dealers-paid-just-percent-clunkers-claims-congressman-says/?test=latestnews

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/swine-flu-h1n1-flu-vaccine-shortage-panic/story?id=8915650

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534605,00.htmlhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534605,00.html