~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
There are a handful of blogs that I read that I've never commented on. One of those - Clusterfook - recently wrote a thought provoking post on health care coverage. Lisa's perspective on health care coverage is far different than mine, and understandably so - she's been battling cancer for years.
Her post was inspired by a post of another blogger, Miss Britt. Miss Britt is one of those bloggers who I've seen "around town," but never visited, although after reading her post, Yes, Health Care is a Right, that will likely change. No, I'm not going to be a thorn in her side because I disagree with her (which I do), but rather because I find her perspective interesting and likely representative of many people I know.
Health Care is a HUGE issue in this election. Personally, I think it'swrong a stretch to say that health care is a "right" - that because the Declaration of Independence speaks of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness," that somehow translates to health care coverage for all (the foundation of Miss Britt's argument that health care is a right) - but then I'm not a member of the Constitution being a living, breathing document either. That being said, there are some very real issues surrounding health care coverage in this country:
We (as a family) are quite fortunate. Husband's employer picks up a great deal of the cost of health care coverage - the cost to our family of five (all three children are still covered) is just over $2,000 per year - this includes health, dental and vision coverage. We've also been blessed with excellent health. Other than the occasional routine exam, strep throat or sports injury, we seldom visit the doctor. If we figure in copays for doctor visits (counseling copays are $30/week) and prescriptions, we'll like see costs this year in the $5000 range, and I am considering our situation as fortunate.
Those who support universal health care usually claim that health care is an expensive privileged for the few. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 84% of Americans have health insurance. 84% would certainly qualify as an overwhelming majority of Americans. Yes, in many cases, it is expensive, but so are many things in this country that aren't "rights." Auto insurance and homeowners insurance - coverages that are required by law - aren't provided by the government and can be quite expensive depending upon your circumstances and history.
Did you know that Federal Law prohibits denying health care to someone who needs it? That doesn't mean you won't have to be financially responsible for the care you receive, but it does mean that you will not be required to just sit in the corner and die. In nearly every city in America, there are hospitals who, on a daily basis, treat patients who have no way of paying. There are also thousands of clinics and programs (government and private) to help those who cannot pay catastrophic medical bills.
I'm not happy with the proposed health care plans of either candidate in this presidential election. One of them MANDATES that every child born will be covered by a health care plan that their parents will be required to fund. The other, although claiming to promote competition amongst insurance providers, offers nothing more than assumptions regarding how it will actually accomplish that. Both candidates claim they'll at least partially fund their plans through better management of health care. Please give me one instance of when government interference has made things better - not short term, but long term!
I think we, as Americans (said generally), use the word "right" without consideration of the cost associated with the "right." What are we willing to give to secure the "right" or are we just entitled because we were born in the greatest country in the world? Should it be a "right" to have a permanent place to live? A "right" to an acceptable standard of living? A "right" to a certain level of education? More importantly, what price are you willing to pay for those "rights?"
Depending on who wins this election, you might be quite surprised at what price you'll pay, and I'd be willing to bet that it won't just be measured in dollars and cents.
Her post was inspired by a post of another blogger, Miss Britt. Miss Britt is one of those bloggers who I've seen "around town," but never visited, although after reading her post, Yes, Health Care is a Right, that will likely change. No, I'm not going to be a thorn in her side because I disagree with her (which I do), but rather because I find her perspective interesting and likely representative of many people I know.
Health Care is a HUGE issue in this election. Personally, I think it's
- Coverage can be extremely expensive depending upon deductibles, level of coverage, heath history, etc.
- If coverage lapses it can be difficult to find a stand-alone policy that is affordable.
- If coverage lapses and you have a significant preexisting condition, it is almost impossible to secure health care coverage.
- Many employers do not (or cannot) offer coverage making the individual responsible for the entire cost.
- Malpractice lawsuit awards are often completely unreasonable and over the top.
We (as a family) are quite fortunate. Husband's employer picks up a great deal of the cost of health care coverage - the cost to our family of five (all three children are still covered) is just over $2,000 per year - this includes health, dental and vision coverage. We've also been blessed with excellent health. Other than the occasional routine exam, strep throat or sports injury, we seldom visit the doctor. If we figure in copays for doctor visits (counseling copays are $30/week) and prescriptions, we'll like see costs this year in the $5000 range, and I am considering our situation as fortunate.
Those who support universal health care usually claim that health care is an expensive privileged for the few. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 84% of Americans have health insurance. 84% would certainly qualify as an overwhelming majority of Americans. Yes, in many cases, it is expensive, but so are many things in this country that aren't "rights." Auto insurance and homeowners insurance - coverages that are required by law - aren't provided by the government and can be quite expensive depending upon your circumstances and history.
Did you know that Federal Law prohibits denying health care to someone who needs it? That doesn't mean you won't have to be financially responsible for the care you receive, but it does mean that you will not be required to just sit in the corner and die. In nearly every city in America, there are hospitals who, on a daily basis, treat patients who have no way of paying. There are also thousands of clinics and programs (government and private) to help those who cannot pay catastrophic medical bills.
I'm not happy with the proposed health care plans of either candidate in this presidential election. One of them MANDATES that every child born will be covered by a health care plan that their parents will be required to fund. The other, although claiming to promote competition amongst insurance providers, offers nothing more than assumptions regarding how it will actually accomplish that. Both candidates claim they'll at least partially fund their plans through better management of health care. Please give me one instance of when government interference has made things better - not short term, but long term!
I think we, as Americans (said generally), use the word "right" without consideration of the cost associated with the "right." What are we willing to give to secure the "right" or are we just entitled because we were born in the greatest country in the world? Should it be a "right" to have a permanent place to live? A "right" to an acceptable standard of living? A "right" to a certain level of education? More importantly, what price are you willing to pay for those "rights?"
Depending on who wins this election, you might be quite surprised at what price you'll pay, and I'd be willing to bet that it won't just be measured in dollars and cents.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
31 comments:
I think it comes down to what is right morally is not always an inalienable right.
I'm such a fence sitter on this one!
This is a practical issue. Americans spend much more on healthcare than citizens of other developed nations and have poorer health outcomes despite the extra expense.
That extra expense translates into higher labor costs for people who want to employ Americans, which in turn drives more jobs that can be sent overseas to other nations.
We should have a collective, rather than an individual, response to the provision of healthcare for much the same reason we have a collective response to providing transportation infrastructure or national security: because it's impractical and expensive to do otherwise.
In terms of healthcare coverage, my family would pay much more for it if the Republican Party won the White House this year, because their plan would dramatically raise our taxes: the employer-based plan we have -- which costs a total of $1800 a month for a family of four -- would now be taxable income. So not only would the employer pay just as much or more to cover American employees, those same employees would now have much higher taxes. In our case, the proposed rebate would not come anywhere near covering the increased taxes, and if employers dropped coverage -- since the same plan would make it much easier to do that -- we'd have higher taxes and, in our state, pay about $8,000 more a year out of our own pocket.
I live in one of the few states where we have a universal healthcare coverage law. We have higher coverage rates at a lower cost than all but two other states, both tiny and in New England. We also have the lowest rates of bankruptcy caused specifically by medical costs. We don't have single payer and you can still go to any doctor you choose.
It's a practical decision, and it's not an all-or-nothing decision; we don't have to choose between the free-market free-for-all that drove up costs or a UK-style NHS. Where I live we have neither and we still have lower costs without huge increases in taxes.
OMG, I can't believe I put such a political-wonk post on a blog I enjoy for, um, well not for the political coverage (not that that's not top rate).
Election. Cannot. Come. Soon. Enough!!
Wow, you certainly are fortunate. Sounds like you are paying about the same as me but you have a family of three and I'm covering myself alone.
I'm a little confused that you would lump auto insurance in with health insurance. Those two things are not comparable.
I have a simplistic view on this. I can't help it...It's a Sermon on the Mount kinda thing. We live in the most successful, richest country in the world.
No one should go hungry or without health care. And, I'm not talking about codified emergency care. I'm talking about health care period.
How do we pay for it? No idea. But any candidate who thinks the same as I do on this issue and wants to work to that end, helps him or herself to earn my vote. Cheers!!
My immediate reaction the very first time I read about Obama's "mandate" that people get insurance to cover their kid (much like most states "mandate" that we all carry liability insurance on our cars) was "Wow, do we really have to force people by law to take care of their kids?"
I guess we do.
Funny thing about that mandate is that if they don't have insurance they just go to the county ER every time the kid sneezes and the taxpayers pick up the full cost. So, I guess that mandate is not exactly "Socialism" as not mandating in some ways?
Of course Obama does offer a tax credit for people who are mandated to buy that insurance.
On the other hand McCain wants to offer a tax credit for buying insurance.
Uh .. yeah.
If you really want a national single payer SOCIALIST health care system (Which I don't) then you should simply expand Medicare to cover everyone, right? I mean, the system is already in place and we all have a Social Security card so there ya go. All the insurance companies can close up shop and everyone will be covered by the gummit.
But, if we do that then doctors wouldn't be able to afford Porches and memberships at fancy exclusive country clubs. Something that they often times believe is their "right."
What I can't seem to find out though, is if Obama would allow for exemptions if kids are covered through state administered programs. Like most things I think that health insurance is better handled on a state level.
I realize that some states will be better about this than others, but if you think your state's system is not good enough move. Seriously, move to the state with the better system. I know it's not that easy, but in the end if that's what is best for your family and kids then that's what you might have to do, right?
I read Ms. Brit's health care post also. I think anyone who knows me at all would know that I could not disagree more with that out look. But I just keep my opinions to myself and move on.
I speak not specifically of Ms. Brit, but I often think my opinions fall on deaf ears. And I have learned that counter-opinions are not always welcomed in comments.
Good for you for doing a post like this, where you explain side so clearly.
RLL, but should a moral "right" be commanded - and managed - by the government?
Helen, Based on the research I've done, my family would actually fare better with the Republican plan. Although we are solidly middle class, Obama's plan costs my family more. I don't know how much research you've done on the "taxable income" part of McCain's plan, but let me say that part of the plan has been misrepresented by the Obama campaign.
I agree, this needn't be an all-or-nothing decision, however that is the way it is being presented by both of the candidates - no matter how they try to mask it.
And I am thrilled that you went political-wonky on me!!
Knight, it is actually a family of FIVE that is covered under those costs, and yes - we are fortunate - but there has also been 25 years of work history and education that has allowed the family this opportunity.
My comparison was not in the types of insurance (they are certainly very different), but in the fact that the government MANDATES auto and homeowner's insurance, but does not PROVIDE it.
Matt-Man, on this we agree! It's the damn mighty dollar question that is a sticking point for me in both Obama and McCain's plans! It's also with this concept of "Rights" - a HUGE semantics issue for me!
Jay, I am a firm believer in decisions such as health care being left up to State government rather than Federal government and find it interesting that people have all but forgotten that was the intent of this country's founding father's. The Constitution was designed for freedom of choice - at the state level - rather than the Federal government meddling in the lives of every citizen.
I guess I think of owning a home or an automobile as a luxury since I have neither. I don't think of health care as a luxury so I guess that is why the comparison confused me. I understand the point you are making.
Nope, I think it should not be. But then I hear stories and I think why can't we take care of these people. And then and then and then.
See...still fence sitting.
Great post and comments, though!
You know Dana, on this point you and I agree! *gasp!*
Because of my education and employer, I have a medical coverage that is completely covered by my employer. It was a benefit I insisted on before I signed my employment contract with them.
Now? When my annual review comes up after this election, I don't think I'll be able to get that same kind of coverage again. Granted, it will still be less that what the "average" American pays for, but it's not the standard I'm used to.
My biggest concern right now is the whole idea that if you feel something should be yours, the it's your "right" to have it, and anything standing in your way is then opressing your rights...
Where I come from, and how I was raised, those were called obstacles. And when you overcame an obstacle on your road to success, you then were able to appreciate and enjoy that goal so much more because of the adversity that you went through to gain your objective.
I don't know anymore. Seems like everyone wants something on a silver platter without really doing the time or paying the price for what they want.
Can we just agree that work needs to be seriously taken into consideration here??
OK, so this is the best post I have read today out of all my blogs. Good points all around.
I could not agree with you more!
Karen, I will admit that many of the comments were very much as disturbing to me as the post was!
Knight, you might be surprised that MANY people believe owning a home is their "right" - those would be the ones who have contributed to the mortgage/banking crisis!
RLL, I feel your frustration! Let me add another thought to the mix - if the government is managing our health care, will they feel the need to manage activities that increase our chances of getting sick? Say ... obesity, smoking or drinking for instance.
Jormengrund, No way! You agree with me?? *snicker* I am quite concerned by the (what I see as) overuse of the word "right" and the complete lack of responsibility many feel in securing those "rights"
Flyinfox, well thank you!!
I'm not surprised. I know people think having a home is their right. I don't agree with them. You have other options. For the record, I don't believe having health care is my right. It shouldn't be a privilege either.
Let me tell you, I am one of those who pays more than twice what you pay. I cover my son (still in school) and my ex (by agreement in our divorce) and my company only contributes $200/month to the policy (and I am a lucky one, I negotiated that...many of their employees only get $100.00/month).
My policy for healthcare alone is almost $1100.00/month.
Thankfully, that is pre-taxed dollars, so I am not burdened with paying the taxes on that also.
I find it deplorable that there are those who can not pay for or get health care coverage. My ex is a chronic pain sufferer...in three years if she does not have a full-time job she will be without helath care (our provider will only cover her for three years from the time of the divorce)
She will NEVER get coverage with the number of visits, the medication costs and the pre-existing condition.
We need to do something about this, and maybe by denying many of the lawsuits brought against doctors and health providers we can lower the overall costs, because, as you say so many are frivolous crap issues.
A right is not something you can force a person to convey to you. It is a freedom that is not suppose to be taken away from you. I feel everyone should have access to health care if they want it, but not because the government mandates it. If anyone can look at how the Federal Government operates and still feel that the Feds are capable of running a health care system, your nuts. Can we say Veterans Hospitals for $100.00, Alex.
Emergency health care in the US is legally required to be given to anyone who shows up at the Emergency room. When the government mandates everything for us we will no longer be free.
It's true our health care system is not working very well. And why is this? Because the government is involved, thats why.
I believe there is a fix for our health care SNAFU in America. It doesn't involve Uncle Sugar running it for us. There is no free lunch. I don't want the government telling me what kind of health care I can have.
I have a question -
if your husband lost his job and then Cobra ran out and he couldn't find a comprable position and any one of you got sick - well you'd need some help wouldn't you.
and would you want people to think less of you - or lump you into categories like "those who started the mortgage crisis" - was it Bush Sr. who used to say - there you go again with that ...
I pay more than twice what you pay and will soon pay even more because I had to lay off the staff that made me eligible as a group. So they are screwed and I'm screwed and ya know what ...
I too have 25+ years work experience and education.
So what!? In Republican America that makes me nothing.
You make it sound as though working hard and doing the right thing is all you need to live comfortably - when in fact you're just very lucky.
About all that separates us is luck Dana.
For the record, don't ever feel like you can't disagree with me. Please.
And people NEED to discuss things like this - especially if we disagree. That's how we come up with solutions.
The only thing I want to say is that I do not use the word "right" easily. One of my big pet peeves is the sense of entitlement that people have in this country.
I'm glad my post made you think and talk about it. :-)
Knight, I would agree, health care should not be a privilege. Many will argue that it is , and for some, it really is out of reach.
Bond, You'll get no argument - the health care (i.e. insurance) system is broken, and needs to be fixed. I don't have answers, but I honestly believe that the government mandating coverage - punishing employers for not offering coverage - just creates more problems.
Doomed, you know I feel much the same way, and you are exactly right - the more we gravitate to this nanny state providing everything for us, the less freedom we have.
Dianne, you seem to work under the assumption that I don't believe you (and others) need fair and reasonably priced health care - that the system is perfect the way it is. I've not said that - no where in this post - I don't think anywhere in this blog.
Do I think we should fix the system so that more people can afford quality health care? Absolutely! Do I think health care should be a "right?" Absolutely not!
I don't know how I made it sound that working hard and doing the right thing is all that it takes. I think the word I used was that we are FORTUNATE. Does the fact that my husband and I are both college educated and have employment in growing industries contribute to our luck? You cannot deny they play a role.
Dianne, we actually agree - the health care system is BROKEN. We just don't agree on how it should be fixed.
Miss Britt, as I said in my post, I'll be visiting you more often - and I might just comment.
I prefer not to subsidize other peoples expenses through mandate or taxation.
Also, people with no medical coverage tend to have fewer health problems. People get sick more often if someone else is paying the bill.
I love Miss Britt. I visit her almost daily, and yes, I usually comment!
But things like this? I don't think I'm educated enough on the problems to know how to fix it. I can say this. My 22 year old son has a cyst on his brain. He has no insurance, and no doctor will see him. My youngest son recently hurt his knee, really bad, but he has no health insurance. He could go to a "free" clinic, that isn't really free, but he owes so much money from getting hurt by a man who hit him with a car and took off, that he doesn't want to owe anymore.
Yea, I wish there was "free" insurance, simply for my boys.
Bina, the answer here is simple.
Hospitals are bound by govenment laws to aid those who are injured or sick.
Thus, take your boys to the hospital, and have them treated.
Mayo Clinic, St. Thomas, whatever.
According to the laws governing institutional hospitals, they HAVE to see everyone, regardless of their income and monetary status.
So that's my advice to you. Grab them both, and get them taken care of.
Folks seem to mostly agree that a more economical and efficient health care system is needed....
The dividing line seems to consistently fall between the people that want/demand better coverage but have no idea how to pay for or implement it versus the people who recognize the significant financial and organizational obstacles in paying for and implementing any improved or more economical coverage.
"I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today..." worked for Wimpy, but expecting 'universal coverage' without understanding the $ ramifications is just asking for trouble...
This is what I'm seeing happening in health care...the cost of health care is rising by the by the abuse of the system and non payers. The payers have this worked into their fee to pay for the non payers. I won't deny that the payers do abuse the system more but overall their nonpayment is less. The Medicare system is absolutely fubar'd. Reimbursement is crap and only getting worse. Medicaid is even worse than Medicare for reimbursement. Therefore, private insurance is a cash cow for price gouging.
I don't think that government is the answer for universal health care. There needs to be some legislation, however, that says that insurance companies cannot post multi million dollar profits ever year. If they do, then they need to reinvest that money and drop the premium for their customers.
Just my $.02
I'm retired and my COBRA has run out. For the next 19 months, until I'm eligible for Medicare, I will be underinsured because of pre-existing medical conditions. Basically, I need to stay healthy.
Dana, it's not whether the Constitution is a living, breathing document. Rather, it's whether this is a society that evolves with time. The health-care system is so terrible, that if a productive functional system could be put in place it would pay for itself. In the mature society health care is a right not a privilege. Why should a dying Mickey Mantle with cancer be entitled to a liver transplant that he didn't deserve, when countless poor black people, Hispanic people, and even a few white people die from the lack of a liver transplant or some other vital necessary health care service.
Richard, I will admit that I have hear hundreds of times, "Well, I might as well go in to see the Doc - it's only a $20 co-pay for piece of mind. You have to wonder who benefits from that mentality.
Bina, as Jormengrund said, there is Federal Law in place that allows for the care of your sons. It's not perfect, but it is something!
Michael, one of my greatest concerns is the way this country has been making long-term decisions based on short-term results. Terrifying ... really!
Average, you opinion is interesting because your perspective is unique amongst my readers.
Neil, I agree, the health-care system is terrible, and if a productive functional system could be put in place it would pay for itself, I just don't believe it is the Federal Government's job to put that in place. Let the State government tackle it. At least that way, I still maintain my freedom of choice.
Post a Comment