The new 'Republican Enhanced' Congress is up and running and I'm already hearing some rhetoric that is causing me some anxiety and confusion. It seems that the new leader of the house and his minions have declared war on the 'ObamaCare' health bill and are bound and determined to strike it down, even though their best efforts are only likely to get as far as crippling or maiming its implementation. They are doing it, they say, to fulfil campaign promises. My take is that it will just be more wasted time, time that could be used to try to get the real economy, employment, back on its feet.
While I heartily applaud their notion of following through on promises, I cannot help be reminded of Joe Clarke's disastrous tranfer of the Canadian Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. It too was a follow up to campaign promises, but it was a symbolic move with disastrous consequences. In this case, I just do not understand why they are so viscerally opposed to the legislation. It appears that they are responding to a deep well of resistance to the bill that they claim to get from public opinion, but if that's true my question is equally applied to the greater masses, what is so bad about it?
From what I have gathered about this bill, I can understand being dissatisfied with it, I know that I am. However, I'm getting a sense that there's something out there that's far more deep rooted than the level of dissatisfaction that I'm feeling. To me it's a question of tweaking, to them it seems far more fundamental. There's fear and loathing there. It's almost as though Obama passed legislation which say that God does not exist! Nobody has yet been able to explain to me where this feeling comes from, why it is so strong or why it even exists.
I don't think that many people will disagree with the statement that the system of Medical Care in this country is broken. I recognize that I have been very fortunate to have avoided any serious Medical Disasters in my life. I sincerely hope that it continues that way and I do all that I can to keep healthy. I have friends who have not been so fortunate. It is by no means a stretch to say that, in this country, a serious illness or disability can turn a prosperous family into a destitute one, a situation that I find completely unacceptable in a civilized society. Not only are you left having to deal with health management concerns, you're also having to deal with questions of survival such as food on the table and a roof over your head.
One argument that I have heard and can relate to is the one of cost, medical care is too expensive. I completely agree, but I don't agree with the assertion that the best way to contain these costs is to let the market work. Another thing that I have heard a lot of is the fear that the Government will be controlling your options, telling you how you can and cannot manage your own health. I certainly don't want to live in a world where my medical options are dictated by the Government, but right now my medical options are being dictated by Insurance Companies and I don't want that either. I do, on the other hand, want my medical options to be properly understood and properly regulated so I can have some faith in their efficacy. I believe that the the proper place for such a responsibility to reside is with the government and with the experts in an open dialog, uncontaminated (as far as possible) by the need to feed the bottom line. In my estimation there are too many people making far too much money on the backs of the poor unfortunate members of our society who are burdened with illness of some sort.
I look at the bottom line like this. People get sick. It's a fact of life. You can go back to anchient ways of processing that and decide that it's God's judgement, or you can say it's all their own fault, or you can place the responsibility/blame wherever you like, it doesn't matter because they will get sick anyway. This means that, in some cases, people, tax paying, dues paying, stand up, contributing members of our society will be faced with the possibility of illness and sometimes even death. A significant number of these people will be converted from contributers to passengers. I could argue that it's really just a transfrmation from one kind of contribution to another, but I'm going to leave that one alone this time. I'm focused on the bottom line, on their financial contribution. Put it another way, they go from financial producer to financial consumer. The next question is, who is responsible for their wellbeing now that they cannot be responsible for their own. Bear in mind too that in many cases these people also have dependents.
There is a school of thought that seems to say that it's up to the individual to take care of themselves. In other words there is no imperative for society to provide the necessary care, it has to come from savings, insurance, family, friends or the kindness of strangers. My feeling is that if one follows this to its logical conclusion it is perfectly acceptable for hospitals to turn out potentially terminal patients because they cannot pay for the medical help they need. To turn people away, to kick them out onto the street to die, that is an acceptable outcome. Personally, I find this conclusion offensive and completely unacceptable and for that reason I reject the premise of that particular school of thought. I believe that society does indeed have the responsibility to do everything that it can to take proper care of its passengers, whoever they are. People will still die, but we must always do what we can to provide the proper care for them.
It seems to me that because of this self sufficiency school of thought, coupled with a kind of realization that it's not moral for hospitals to turn people out on the street, we have a kind of hybrid system that really doesn't deliver a good, consistent level of care at a reasonable cost. Because the hospitals cannot legally turn people away because they cannot pay, they have to recoup the cost in other ways, like charging ridiculous amounts to those who can pay and those who are insured. Of course, Insurance companies don't want the hospitals to get away with that, so they pass the cost on to their customers in the form of higher premiums. Insurance companies also impose limits on what they will pay for different procedures and also work to influence doctors to employ the more profitable procedures, all to protect their bottom line. Given all of these factors, how can it be a surprise that Healthcare is expensive? Is it not obvious that, at every turn, the system should always provide incentives that promote patient wellbeing over bottom line benefits. It's very obvious to me and I definitely don't see that in the present system. Thankfully, there are a whole host of good, even excllent medical practitioners who manage to provide positive medical experiences and good medical outcomes to their patients. Just think how it could be if they were allowed to do their jobs properly!
