After the media buzz around presidents Obama’s health care speech to congress, as well as his own egging that he wanted us all to “tune in”, one would have expected a little more from Wednesday night’s speech. While, as always, Mr. Obama presented a well written and well spoken speech, it basically outlined the same bill that American’s have already been debating for the past month and a half. (Come-on Mr. President, I could have been watching “So you think you can Dance.”) I was hoping to hear something new, but fear not avid prune juice readers, I still have a thing or two to say about this little health care topic.
I can appreciate president Obama’s frustration with the rumors that have been flying around with this proposal. Opponents are exaggerating of the possibilities that could result from the passing of HR 3200 or a similar health care bill. While there are not literally panels of angry bureaucrats plotting to torture our grandparents to death, there are a number of issues that do require further discussion.
The public option that has been proposed for the purpose of providing competition has a few gaping holes in it. First and for most, its success is dependent on a set of rules and restrictions limiting private insurance company’s freedom and mandating that they insure people with preexisting conditions. If, as the president is suggesting, the public option could provide lower costs than what the insurance companies are currently offering, it would not be necessary to set up mandates for private companies that would drive up their costs. If a public option could provide better coverage at lower costs, competition and the free market would drive down costs for private insurance companies. Secondly, the public option would offer nationwide coverage while private companies are banned for crossing state lines. We cannot expect fair competition when the government plan not only has the benefit of enforcing the mandates on everyone else, but isn’t even expected to play by the same rules as private companies.
President Obama’s proposal is revolutionary in the fact that it would mandate that every American purchase health care. He compared this requirement to car insurance saying, “Individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance - just as most states require you to carry auto insurance”. Ah yes, but what he failed to mention is that car insurance is only required if you own/drive a car. This would be the very first tax in the history of the United States of America that taxes individuals for being alive. Let me repeat that, this bill would require American’s to pay just for being alive. However, while we are on the subject of comparing car insurance to health insurance, let’s look at the proposed mandate to require insurance companies to insure those with preexisting conditions. It would be like crashing your car and then attempting to purchase insurance to pay for it (which by the way is considered fraud). But as President Obama said “Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.” If that isn’t socialism, I don’t know what is.
Then there is the issue of cost. President Obama promises to pay for this estimated 8 trillion dollar proposal by “finding it” in the budget. Is it true that there are billions of wasted dollars in our budget? Absolutely, but if it was so easy to find and remove this waste, why has no other president in history ever thought of this genius idea as a way to fund their budget? Thomas Jefferson once said, "never spend your money before you have it." Until we have secured this money, or at least secured a realistic plan of weeding it out, we cannot commit to spending it.
Near the end of his speech, President Obama threw the conservative base a small bone saying, “I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It's a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.” However, this comes just days after saying this about conservatives “I-I’ve got a question for all those folks. What’re you gonna do? What’s your answer? What’s your solution? And ya’ know what, they don’t have one! Their answer is to do nothing!” and weeks after this “I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out the way so we can clean up the mess. I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking.” This kind of switch hitter language makes me leery about trusting a promise that president will address tort reform when he isn’t suggesting it be incorporated into any bill or volunteering any details as to how is plan will work or how it will substantially affect medical liability.
President Obama repeatedly talked about the issue of people losing insurance when they move or change jobs. This reform plan does nothing to address that issue. Health insurance will still, in most cases, be tied to jobs. The issue of rising costs is poorly addressed, suggesting that this one additional competing company will significantly curb ever increasing costs. While this plan would increase the number of Americans that have coverage, without a successful plan to lower costs, and a way to let Americans keep their insurance when changing jobs, while not restricting the rights of individuals in private companies, we still have a failing plan.
Don’t let the frustration that this is the only plan you’ve been offered limit your open-mindedness to the option of revolutionizing the health care system in a successful way. Some may say “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.” That is a nice way of saying, “settle”. Settle for a plan that takes away your rights and options, costs more in taxes and coverage, and discourages personal responsibility. I’m not ready to settle and you shouldn’t be either. Let's fix it.
