Author P. J. O'Rourke said it best: "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free." Keep this in mind.
The Missourian recently parroted some of the statistics off of the National Coalition on Health Care Web site. The so-called "fact" that always gets me is the one bandied about, that there are some 50 million uninsured in America. This number has been proven to be grossly overstated. For example, many young Americans choose not to have health care. They choose no coverage not because they can't afford it, but they have made the calculated risk that they will not need it. Julia A. Seymour, of Business & Media Institute, says another category that is counted, that shouldn't be, are those temporarily off of insurance, transitioning from one job to another. She says that 45 percent of the 50 million can be counted in this category. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau says that 10 million uninsured are not even U.S. citizens.
From the Kaiser Family Foundation, a liberal nonprofit frequently quoted by the media, puts the number of uninsured Americans who do not qualify for current government programs and make less than $50,000 a year between 13.9 million and 8.2 million. And while I have no doubt that The Missourian did not intend to misstate the situation, many Americans are being duped by the fallacious statistics squeezed through the baloney grinder, affectionately known as the Obama Media Networks.
If the number is in fact closer to 13 to 9 million, we may want to proceed lightly with any serendipitous attempts at changing health care. I have seen how Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security programs are being run by the government - run straight into the ground. Are Americans supposed to now believe that anything will be different under nationalized health care? If government ends up running health care, "they" will be the ones that decide who will and will not get care. If you are over 60 or have chronic illnesses, you had better be very concerned about this "change" in health care. The new administration, through the stimulus plan, has funded a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. Again, if you are a senior, get used to this phrase: "Comparative Effectiveness Research." Simply put, the government, with limited resources, will decide on (for example) who will and will not get joint replacements. Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., a heart surgeon, warned that it would lead to "denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care." In England, comparative effectiveness research is used frequently to deny certain medical procedures to high risk patients.
But why are medical expenses exploding? Is it possible that government meddling in medical insurance, through bureaucratic regulations, could have something to do with escalating prices? Could entire batteries of needless tests, that doctors are scared into prescribing, are the direct result of the litigious, sue crazy world we live in, have something to do with skyrocketing prices? Fixing these problems do not require a radical change in health care, they require commonsense approaches, a commodity I am not so sure the federal government possesses.
So yes, the health system is getting too expensive, and millions of Americans who need coverage don't have it. But to characterize the situation as "seriously troubled" may be a bit of a stretch . . . that is unless the government takes over - then we will be in "serious trouble."
Guy W. Midkiff
