Our Choice

I have been waiting to comment on health care reform until it looked like passage or failure of an actual bill was a possibility. With the news that Ben Nelson now plans on voting for the Senate's version of a bill, it appears we are getting closer to finding out if we will get a signed bill or not.

I do not want to comment on the specifics of either the House or Senate bill (such as who will get a tax increase, what fines will be for not participating, etc.), as any specifics of the two bills will be completely renegotiated during the conferencing process. My concerns are with general principles surrounding this debate, such as:

1) Tax increases. Cut it however you want, a tax increase on the rich is also a tax increase on the poor. A tax increase on business is also a tax increase on the consumer. Everyone will suffer if taxes are raised on anyone. Fines for not participating in this system fall into this category.

2) Limiting profits so insurers pay more for the cost of health care. The idea of limiting health care providers' profits is frightening to me. Will we begin limiting the profits of any profitable business? Won't other factions of the economy suffer, such as those employed by health care providers (either in terms of amount of people employed or how much they make) or vendors of health care providers (advertising, computer software)? Won't drug makers and doctors charge more for their products and services, knowing of the additional requirements that have been placed on health care providers?

3) Rising cost of health care. How exactly is Congress trying to prevent the actual cost of health care from rising (both what we pay out of pocket and what our insurers cover)? I think that is the real concern among Americans. Raising taxes or limiting profits will not get to the heart of the problem (it will only punish difference facets of the economy). Only increasing competition will lower the cost of health care. Ideas for increasing competition, supported by Republicans, include allowing drugs from Canada, allowing insurance to be sold over state lines, and enacting meaningful tort reform (a well-known priority of George Bush). Limiting profits in no way increases competition. Additional regulations will either punish different facets of the economy directly (tax increases) or indirectly (increased costs, loss of customers).

4) Insuring the uninsured. I am not a bad person. If I go unemployed, I will lose my health insurance and be in a huge amount of financial trouble if something bad happens to me. But I do not want my money going to pay for the health care of the uninsured. This would be one more way lazy people who seek to play our government can sit back and collect rewards for the hard work of others (I am not in any way saying that anyone uninsured falls into this category). I would much rather see the government focus on cutting taxes and actual job creation. This will allow more people to get jobs with medical insurance. As the unemployment rate declines, more employers will be forced to give better insurance in order to keep their employees.

5) Consumerism. The health care debate seems to be avoiding one key idea; health care is a product or service that we consume. Some people over consume. Some people think this is some sort of right given to us. We all need to take personal responsibility for our actions. The ultimate solution to this problem is for our country to move toward a single payer health care system (just like our automobile insurance plans). This will force people to be smart about their health care consumption. We know if we get into an accident or get a speeding ticket, our automobile insurance premiums will increase. If we had a similar system for health care, people would do more to keep themselves healthy and limit the cost of medicating themselves. It sounds cruel, but health care is something we need to limit our consumption of (both in terms of quantity and price paid).

6) Republican support. It should alarm people that only one Republican (throughout both chambers of Congress) has gone out and supported their chamber's bill. Obama should refuse to sign any bill of this magnitude without at least 20% of Republicans voting for it. If Obama made this a requirement, he would truly have my respect and admiration for bringing true "change" to Washington: forcing bi-partisanship. If Obama wants to be a leader, here is his chance.

So that is my piece. Since this health care debate has begun, I have limited my fast food consumption as a way to keep eventual health care costs down. I think limiting our own consumption is the only control we each have over health care costs. What can you do to limit your eventual (or current) health care consumption?

I will wait to comment on my support for the health care reform bill until there is actually one to comment on.

Until we meet again, goodbye!