Why not nationalized health care in the United States?

[Guest guest]

Why not nationalized health care in the United States?

Bruce Kesler, The Examiner

Aug 11, 2006 5:00 AM (1 day ago)

WASHINGTON - The " progressive " case for nationalized health care

( " Addressing the country's health care taboo " by Sirota, Aug.

7) begins by saying, " Health insurance should not be a for-profit

industry. "

Sirota then cited examples of better care, or more inexpensively

provided, by not-for-profit organizations or government, and

asserts " politicians don't talk about creating a not-for-profit

health care system because they operate in a pay-to-play culture —

one that rewards their silence, " even though a 2003 poll says many

Americans " support a universal health insurance program, in which

everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that's run by the

government and financed by taxpayers. "

Sirota's piece is a well-written, persuasive and entirely wrong

sophistry that omits the crucial facts.

So-called not-for-profit organizations and governments are not the

answer to better health care, and can only be cheaper by rationed

care, price controls that stifle innovation, and passing costs of

care on to others and the U.S.

The Newsweek article on the revamped Veterans Affairs hospital

system, " The Best Medical Care in the U.S., " is cited as what can be

done by government, but as the article makes clear, it required " the

military way of medicine, " a top doctor to take a sharp cut in

income, and its pathbreaking executive to be fired by Congress for

closing hospitals in " key districts … since the VA is as affected by

politics as any other federal entity, that will always be a concern. "

The innovations and dedication that reformed VA hospitals is being

pursued in other hospital systems, but, as Newsweek points out, a

cause of much added paperwork and unnecessary defensive medicine

elsewhere, is not the VA's restriction, as " doctors don't have to

worry as much about malpractice lawsuits, since government agencies

are somewhat protected. "

I've been in the health care insurance business for two decades, and

before that was a finance and operations executives for giant and

start-up companies.

I've never seen anyone who wants to pay the full bill on what it

takes to provide quick access to the highest quality medicine

possible.

But the full bill is what it takes. We've shuffled the costs about,

with the more responsible folks of moderate or higher means forced to

pick up the tab, but the tab remains and grows with an ageing

population and scientific advances.

I've also never seen anyone who doesn't want and need expert

counseling in both their insurance choices, and have repeatedly come

to the aid of those who depended upon government bureaucracies for

their understanding of their choice or — more usually — lack of

choice.

Commissions to agents have been drastically cut over the past decade,

and it is increasingly difficult to provide pro bono services.

Most of the administrative costs differences calculated between

private and public health care are illusory, due to costs hidden

elsewhere in government budgets or in reduced customer service.

Other countries, notably Canada and those in Europe, with national

health care have been forced by these same costs to cut covered

services, raise co-pays, and lengthen their waiting lines.

Twenty percent of German doctors are emigrating, as have similar

proportions from the other nationalized medicine countries.

The country of choice: United States.

They also hold down their costs by refusing to pay full price for

advanced medicines, not developed there due to lack of financial

incentive, shifting costs to Americans. As to poll data, free lunch

paid for by others consistently wins, but in the reality of the

ballot box schemes for government health care consistently lose.

Americans overwhelmingly and repeatedly reject the loss of choice and

quality.

The only ones who would profit from government health care are those

who profit from enlarged government, runaway government unions, high-

pension bureaucrats, and those able but unwilling to carry their

financial responsibilities. Everyone else loses.

Our politicians are not bought off; they just reflect the popular

will.

Bruce Kesler blogs at ProjectDemocracy.com.

http://www.examiner.com/a-

213520~Bruce_Kesler__Why_not_nationalized_health_care_in_the_United_St

ates_.html