The Forum pages of the Herald-Zeitung have published letters to the editor addressing the current federal effort toward universal health care.
The robust dialogue indicates that many care deeply about how we will provide for our health and welfare.
The real challenge, of course, is how to finance it.
In no other nation do the people pay so much for increasingly so little, with health insurance still unaffordable for so many. It seems unfair to have Medicare and Medicaid deducted from one’s paychecks — and at the same time earn too much money to qualify for either and earn too little money to afford health insurance.
Employer-based health coverage is staggeringly expensive. It also denies many people the dream of starting their own business, or taking a chance with an upstart company because they fear losing health care coverage. Indeed, the employer-based system of insuring is counterproductive to the American free market system and wholly discourages the entrepreneurial spirit. The current system is simply bad for business and our ability to compete in the world marketplace.
However, don’t be misled into believing that the only path toward universal coverage is direct government intervention in a style like that of Canada’s single payer system. Not all universal health cares systems are alike.
The Dutch had a system that was two-thirds public while the upper third income earners bought private insurance themselves. They now have a fully private, universal system that combines heavy regulation of insurers and pharmaceutical drugs with vouchers for lower income workers to buy insurance. This has brought them greater satisfaction and lower costs. The Euro Health Consumer Index (EHCI) ranked the Dutch as having the best health system in Europe.
The Japanese have a publicly financed/subsidized system, but consumers choose regional nonprofit social insurance companies, much like in Germany, and all hospitals and doctors’ offices are private, though heavily regulated ventures. They go to the doctor about three times the rate as Americans with insurance, and without making appointments. They are the healthiest population in the world, and according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Health Data 2009, they spend less than a third than the United States for their health care.
Why are these systems not part of the debate? Politicians who argue that the choice is either status quo or socialized medicine do a disservice to their constituents and the country. Based on the experiences of the Netherlands and Japan, one would think we could create a system that functions based on our needs and in our own way.
Clearly we as a nation have important and tough choices to make before we can change our health care system.
Do not allow your congressman or senators to hide behind simple slogans that dismiss any universal health care as socialism. Also, don’t believe advocates of the status quo who tell you that we should do nothing because health care costs will eventually go down through advances in technology.
Finding a better health care system should be a national priority for Congress and President Obama because it’s a national crisis. If our current elected officials in Congress cannot openly and courageously address this crisis, then we need to replace them with leaders who will.
