The Shorthorn - Alternatives exist to Obama’s health care reform

HOME

Columns

Alternatives exist to Obama’s health care reform

Written by Colt Ables, The Shorthorn columnist

Tuesday, 23 June 2009 02:47 PM

Health care has always been a controversial issue. The perpetual question — how much should government be involved?

In 1993, government-run health care became a hot-button issue and was nicknamed “Hillary Care” because of Hillary Clinton’s involvement in the closed-door task force on health care reform proceedings. The Clinton administration wanted to create a foundation for a program that would provide health care for all Americans.

Now, President Barack Obama wants a health care bill on his desk by October.

The health care issue has gotten out of hand. When Obama campaigned during the election, he never provided specifics and he isn’t providing them now.

Health care reform is needed, but the problem will not be solved by forcing all Americans to be covered or by establishing a new government bureaucracy such as Medicare and Social Security. Both social programs are estimated to exceed revenues by 2017. If the government cannot run these systems without losing money, how can we expect them to run a health care system that will work along the same lines?

During an October 7, 2008 debate, Tom Brokaw posed the question, “Is health care in America a privilege, a right, or a responsibility?” Obama answered that he believed health care was a right, meaning it is something we should provide to all citizens as Canada does.

The misconception about government-run health care is that everyone receives all the treatment they need. In the United Kingdom, health care is rationed based upon your age and life expectancy. Women don’t receive treatment that would cure them of breast cancer because it is too expensive. With a government-run health care system, everyone has a price on their head and is viewed with a cost-benefit analysis.

Ideas such as a single-payer system like Medicare, co-op and individual mandates have floated around. But the people losing in the end are the taxpayers.

It’s estimated that health care reform will cost $1 trillion and cuts proposed to Medicare and Medicaid will help foot the bill. Other proposals to pay for it include taxing insurance benefits as personal income, implementing a tax to increase the price of goods overall and taxing carbonated beverages.

Here are a few suggestions to help preserve our current system and lower costs.

First, put a cap on malpractice lawsuits. It will lower the costs passed from the doctor to the consumer. This would also prevent the doctors from practicing “defensive medicine,” meaning they wouldn’t have to prescribe a variety of unneeded tests just to avoid malpractice claims. This would also provide cost relief to patients and health insurance companies.

Second, open more free clinics for those unable to pay for insurance or medical treatment. That will help keep them out of the emergency rooms and from passing the bill to other patients.

Third, deregulate the health insurance industry and increase competition.

And fourth, reward those who take it upon themselves and purchase their own health care by offering a tax credit to act as a partial reimbursement and apply that to employers who provide health care for their employees.

Believe it or not, a government-run system isn’t the right answer. The free-market is.

— Colt Ables is an economics senior and columnist for The Shorthorn

Views: 1174 | E-mail

Be first to comment this article

Last Updated ( Thursday, 20 August 2009 10:39 AM )

< Prev		Next >

[ Back ]