In Response to Objections to Objections To Health Care Reform
Posted: Saturday, October 03, 2009
by Gregory Lewis
PopGnosis
I am unapologeticaly liberal, and I really admire Tex Norman's brand of politics, so I don't want this to be read as a personal attack on the defenders of Health Care Reform.. But, I have some serious concerns with what might be passed, and I base this on what has happened in Massachusetts, where I used to live.
First off, I think we need to understand that health insurance does not translate to health care. Quality health care insurance might, but that's not what most low to middle-low income Americans will be getting, if forced to have to pay for whatever they can afford.
Something is seriously rotten in the health care debate, and the President isn't getting it any more than Congress is getting it: The main beneficiary of "health care" reform is really the insurance companies. We're not getting health care reform, we're getting an unfunded mandate to buy insurance. Wow, the insurance companies have to be licking their greedy chops over this! What insurance exec in his right mind would not want this kind of "health care" reform?
One of the lame arguments I've heard for mandatory health insurance is "there's already mandatory auto insurance."
But, guess what? That's only if you own a car, and owning a car is not mandatory. Driving is considered a privilege in the US. Being a US citizen is more or less mandatory for me, as I was born and have lived here for 50 years. I have been to a doctor about two times since age 27. Let me do the math: $300 X 23 X 12 = $82,800. For cripe sake, no wonder I can't afford a house. I want my G.D. money back!
Take a look at Massachusetts, they don't have better health care. Health care in Massachusetts hasn't changed one iota! What they have is a state where everybody has to be insured, or they are penalized. They're not getting better health care! Massachusetts' ill conceived law is breaking backs that are already broken. If you qualify as low income, you can be subsidized. If you are lower middle income, you are not subsidized, so those people are really getting hit hard, and having to make serious choices between paying the mortgage, buying food, and buying the mandatory health insurance the state has foisted on them. And none of the state representatives are apologizing (yet). I repeat, Massachusetts has done nothing to improve health care, they have only improved the quality of living for people in the insurance industry.
-G
This Article has been viewed 244 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (2 total)Mr. Lewis,We have become a nation of people who demand benefits and entitlements. Our government has responded by trying to give them to us. Unfortunately, because resources are limited, our government must tell us all more and more how to live our lives. As long as we continue to demand more benefits, our freedoms will dwindle away. We are no longer a people who want to be independent and free so we can use that freedom to take care of ourselves. We want our government to do it for us.You said "I resent having to be made to buy health insurance". You are literally saying you believe you have the right to make your own decisions about what you buy, therefore how and where you live. You resent the fact that government does not want you to have the right to make those decisions for yourself. That is a libertarian point of view. Welcome to the libertarian party. By "party", I mean a gathering of friends.Liberals will tell you it is OK for you to be compelled to buy that insurance, because there are those who would otherwise go without it. Libertarians, like me, know we can solve all of our problems as long as we remain a free people. That means we are free to make our lives better, or not - but we are free to make those decisions for ourselves. Roughly 200 years ago, we fought the revolutionary war to free ourselves from the British Crown. Do we really want to go back to living in servitude to a government?There are ways to improve the healthcare system. Remove state boundary restrictions on insurance companies. This would give consumers far more choices by significantly increasing competition. This would result in better quality at lower costs - a by product of free market entrepreneurism.Eliminate defensive medicine by eliminating frivolous and predatory lawsuits.
Thank you for your article. I appreciate the opportunity to read it and respond.Please log in to respond to this comment.
Lisa,I do have a libertarian streak in me. Thanks for commenting.-GPlease log in to respond to this comment.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.