For those for or against government sponsored/single-payer health care (or whatever name the current health care reform proposal is going under), I would urge you to read the following opinion pieces from the New York Times, linked below:
a. The first article, "
The Prescription From Obama’s Own Doctor", by NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, Published: June 24, 2009, is more about what medical associations the Obama administration should seek out to garner support for health care reform, and the American Medical Association, according to the article's auther, ain't it! I found it an interesting read mainly because what I've mostly been hearing about the recent attempts at health care reform has been more on the lines of who won't support it and why government sponsored health care is so wrong as opposed to why it could be a very good thing for physicians and patients alike. While the article doesn't provide alot of insight into why government sponsored health care would be a benefit to all across the board, it does bring the focus of health care reform back to where it should be - on patient care and medical accessibility and not the pocket book.
b. The second article, "
The Only Public Health Plan We Need," By DAVID RIEMER and ALAIN ENTHOVEN, Published: June 24, 2009, provides some very good ideas on what should be included in any government sponsored health care reform bill. The recommendations suggested remind me of how the military provides access to civilian medical services, i.e., choosing from a pool of HMOs, as well as, how such programs like SCHIP currently operate, i.e., sliding fee or fee-for-services. In either case, it's about choice, and that includes the proposed the health care proposal per the United States National Health Insurance Act, H.R. 676, which does provide for an enrollment option and not an automatic across the board blanket enrollment as has been wrongfully espoused by the Right.
Bottom line is this: Medicare and Medicaid, both of which are government entitlement programs, are eating up billions from the national budget, annually. And this despite the fact that Medicaid is partically funded by most states. Neither have proven to be a true "win-win" for the patient and the physician, but it is the only resource many people have - both young and old, healthy and ailing - to obtain the medical coverage, medical attention and medications they need to live healthier lives. Clearly, something needs to be done in order to bring health care cost down. The question, of course, is what is the best way to go about it?
My advise is very simple:
1. Listen to what both sides are saying on the issue.
2. Determine what you believe would be the better recommendations, in whole or in part.
3. Write your Congressman and submit your views on the matter.
Hopefully, in this way we can all see a better health care reform bill that will be fair and suit the majority of people who want it. And those who don't shouldn't be affected by it one way or another, i.e., "establish a 5% health tax on the top 5% of income earners; a 10% tax on top 1% of wage earners". This would be my only concern with the USNHIA (HR 676) as proposed only because wealthy Americans would see this as a penalty against their earnings where as the truth of the matter is they'd only be paying their fair share toward coverage considering that the working class would pay their share via payroll tax. Granted, they'd pay from .25% to upwards of 100% more than the avg. working American (10% versus 4.75%), but somehow I doubt most wealth Americans would even blink an eye at this figure as it's liable to be less than what they pay now. (That's purely speculation on my part...)
Regardless of the arguments on both sides, something has to be done about the rising cost of health care in this country.
