There Is No Health Care Crisis: There Is A Problem With Health Care Coverage
There Is No Health Care Crisis: There Is A Problem With Health Care Coverage
By
Ken Eliasberg
Before charging off in search of a solution to our alleged health care “crisis,” shouldn’t the appropriate place to begin our inquiry be to first identify our problem, determine its nature, size, and shape, and then attempt to arrive at an appropriate solution? Call me silly, but that’s the way I was taught to deal with vexing situations — first, establish that we do indeed have a problem. And, if we do have a problem, how serious is it, and what are our options re coming up with a solution. And, finally, what is the best solution possible. Is that the way we have approached the current health care situation? Hardly! We have been told that there is a “crisis”; that it must be solved immediately; that it will cost one trillion dollars over the next ten years (but will be revenue neutral because Barack, the economic magician, is going to save those dollars with other measures that he will introduce); that it will take some 1,000 pages of legislative prose to adequately address this “crisis;” that almost none of our legislators who would inflict this prose on us have read this proposed solution; that you needn’t read it yourself (because, in the eyes of most Democrat legislators, we are too stupid to determine what is best for our health care needs), so we should accept this monstrosity on faith — you know, the old “trust me” approach to sealing a bargain; and, finally, we are informed that there really is no written bill at all — Congress is to vote on a concept, the details of which will be fleshed out after the fact (and/or, worse yet, behind closed doors with little if any opposition involvement — in other words, the effort here will be to shove this game changing wealth and health destroyer down our throats). However, as I indicated in my opening sentence, before I search for a solution to any problem, I want to make certain of 2 things: (1) that I do indeed have a problem, and (2) that I have a good understanding of the exact nature of what that problem is. So, let’s start there as we embark on our health care journey.
First, to calm the waters of our analysis, I think we should approach this area as I have suggested, i.e. we have (or may have) a “problem;” whether that problem, if it exists, is of such magnitude as to be labeled a “crisis” remains to be seen. So let’s hold off on using such a dramatic characterization of the situation. The Administration likes to so characterize it in order to produce a sufficient sense of urgency to, again, justify cramming their bankruptcy-producing solution down our throats before we have had time to even read it, let alone properly evaluate its responsiveness. As Rahm Emmanuel, the President’s enforcer (excuse me, advisor) has observed, a crisis is an opportunity (and this Administration certainly doesn’t want to miss an opportunity to move us closer to a government takeover). And, by the way, bankruptcy may be the least of our problems; the most serious problem is doing irremediable damage to a damn good health care system (then we can all go to Canada and wait on line to die before we get any treatment, let alone the appropriate treatment).
As a preliminary observation, we are so extraordinarily fortunate in Obama’s having started with his “stimulus package” as opposed to either his health care proposal or his cap and trade bill. Seizing upon his “honeymoon” popularity, he was able to jam “stimulus” through without anyone even having read it. I believe he probably could have done the same with health care, had he rearranged the order of his priorities. Now, that the honeymoon appears to be over, support for his health care package is plummeting (and even his own popularity has been taking a significant hit).
One other preliminary observation — Obama has asked us to accept 3 bills (stimulus, health care, and cap and trade) each of which is over 1,000 pages (that, again, no one has read), that would each cost approximately1 trillion dollars, that promise to bankrupt us, all of which are of questionable value, and to enact these measures in record time. Now this is the same Obama who, in 2004, chastized Bush for “rushing” through the Patriot Act. Bear in mind that the Patriot Act (certain aspects of which have been criticized by Dems, including Obama, and which is now being pretty much followed intact by the Obama Administration) was in response to a genuine crisis (as opposed to the manufactured crises that Obama is trying to have you buy into), i.e. we had just been attacked, on our own soil, by an enemy who killed 3,000 of our citizens. See a column by P.J. Gladnick entitled Obama 2004: Bush Rushed Legislation Through Congress Without Allowing Time To Read Or Debate at Newsbusters.org on 7/27/09. The column, quite understandably, begins with this statement “Hypocrisy alert”! It is also the same Obama who promised us, among other things, the most ethical administration ever, complete transparency, and that the American public would be given ample time to examine proposed legislation well in advance of its enactment.
Back to the health care “crisis” - what are we really talking about? We appear to be talking about those people (originally estimated by Obama at 47 million) who Obama informs us are not covered under our existing health care arrangement. As the healthcare saga evolved, that number broke down into the following relatively equal categories:
Illegal immigrants,
folks who can afford, but do not wish to purchase
health care insurance, and
the balance, i.e. those that would like such coverage,
but cannot afford to purchase it.
Let’s assume that these categories are approximately equal, where does that leave us?
With approximately 15 million people (the illegal aliens, or, if you are a lefty and that term offends you, undocumented workers) who are not entitled, under any view of the situation, to such coverage (and which Obama, under pressure to tell the truth, has taken off the table); with another 16 million who can afford health insurance but do not wish to acquire it; and the final 16 million who would like it but cannot afford to pay the price to purchase it. So, it would appear that we have a 16 million-person problem. How best to solve this problem? Obama’s approach: We need to fundamentally overhaul the entire health care system to address the needs of those folks who want it but can’t afford it. We’ll look at the problem in greater deal in the ensuing columns, but, for openers , I thought it might be helpful to pinpoint the exact nature of our health care problem — it is the uncovered 16 million who wish to be covered but cannot afford coverage.
One final point in closing out this column, and that deals with the notion of some on the left that health care is somehow a “right.” I was confronted by this assertion when I attended the health care meeting that this paper’s left-winger mentioned in a recent column. A lady several rows in front of me was brandishing a sign, which she would occasionally hold up that made that argument, i.e. health care is a right. By what authority is that the case? Don’t get me wrong, it would certainly be nice to provide it if we could afford to do so. By the same token, it would be nice to provide free food, shelter, clothing, and a car if we were so flushed with money that we were in a position to do so. Actually, it would not be nice — it would destroy the work incentive on which America has relied to forge to the front of the world’s pack in so far as a standard of living is concerned. We are a government of laws, and that is what distinguishes us from most of the world’s less fortunates. And I know of no law that makes health care a right — at least not to this point. (to be continued).