Analysis for Critical Thinkers

So often I have heard ignorant people talking about the current health care debate. I have offered to them on various occasions to “show me someone that needs health care and is not getting it and I will take him to an emergency room myself,” where they will get care free of charge (to them). This was something that I had much occasion to do in my emerency medical sevices days.

More often though, lately I have been hearing more and more of the trite liberal talking point that the Republican party is the partyof “no”. “They have no solution of their own to offer, they just want to vote ‘no’!” bray my liberal acquaintances. While this makes for a catchy bumper sticker, there is another aspect which must be examined first.

Bear in mind that I myself am not a Republican — and that I am not in opposition at all to simply voting “no” when it comes to “fixing” the worlds most capable and respected health care system in the world. I resist most strenuously the attempt to tamper with such a wonderful system that we enjoy here in the United States.

What I am addressing here is the preposterous notion that Republicans have no plan of their own to offer. I do not blame those who suffer from the massive ignorance on the issue because after all, you will never hear or see these proposals on the regular news channels or in the popular newspapers. You will never hear these proposals being discussed in sports bars or in Big Government lunch rooms. You will never hear President Obama talk about them because it is reported that he has not even returned any calls from any Republican since he took office. You will not hear Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid talk about these suggestions for health care reform either because they will likely be found spewing hatred against the Republicans for being “evil” and”Nazis” or “stupid” rather than listening and trying to understand a plan that does not seize more power from the people.

Here is a little synopsis of just some Republican proposals for health care that may likely ruin the next  “rant party” hosted by your ignorant liberal friends. Imagine how much sputtering and foaming at the mouth will occur when you put forth such logical arguments and actual proposed laws! Many avoid analytical discourse and gravitate toward emotion and rhetoric instead.

–Empowering Patients First Act- July 2009 – H.R. 3400 – grants access to affordable, quality health care for all Americans. Covers pre-existing conditions, protects employee sponsored insurance, seeks to decreae the cost of health care through decreasig “defensive medicine.”

–ImprovingHealth Care for All Americans Act – July, 2009 – Allows American that are happy with their health care to keep it. Provides pooling mechanisms and group plan choices for everyone. Pre-existing conditions are covered at affordable rates. Keeps families in charge of their health care, not Big Government.

– Medical Rights and Reform Act – June 2009 – Lowers cost and expands access without compromising the doctor-patient relationship. Expands access to Americans without health insurance.

– Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act – June 2009 – Reduces medical costs by reducing frivolous lawsuits by abolishing financial incentives for filing expansve lawsuits. Addresses limits on “pain and suffering” as well as punitive damages that cause health care costs to spiral out of control.

– Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009 –  May 2009 – Attempts to make health care more affordable and more accessible.

– Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities,and Individuals Act of 2009 – July 2009 – To amend the Intenal Revenue Code to promote the use of preventive and wellness programs.

– Improved Employee Access to Health Insurance Act of 2009 – July 2009 – To prevent states from limiting employers from using auto-enrollment for employee health insurance coverage.

– Health Insurance Access for Young Workers and College Students Act of 2009 – October 2009 – Seeks to improve health insurance coverage of dependents (dependents on parents – not on Big Government).

These are a few of the Republican proposals that have been brought up by Republicans in the last year. They may never have seen the light of publicity because they were likely immediately intercepted by the controlling party of Congress that wishes to portray the minority party as the pary of “no”.

What they have in common are the following premises:

-Let families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines.
– Allow individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do.
-Give states the tools to create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
-End junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that physicians sometimes order not because they think it’s good medicine, but because they are afraid of being sued.

Feel free to be against these premises if you wish, but give cogent arguments as to why your way is better. I reject the simple denial that these proposals have been made in the first place.

The contolling party -.- which could have passed any law that they wished in the past year without a single Republican vote — wishes to promote their leviathan 2000 page monstrosity on an unwilling populace without their consent. Even the President himself, while waffling on what he wanted to see in the bill since even before he was elected, has said that he will sign anything that Congress gives to him as long as it has “Health Care Reform” in the title somewhere. Whether any lawmaker even reads or understands the bill is in question as well.

Critics may be against the numerous Republican proposals. They can call them “stupid”. Or better yet, they can debate their merit and give rational analysis and discussion. Ultimately, they can discard the proposals that they are against. But one thing that an honest politician cannot do — is deny that the Republicans have any suggestions of their own. One can keep insisting that “bipartisan” means simply “voting Democrat” or one can engage in serious discussion and debate.

It is common today to hear people complain about high insurance premiums for all types of insurance including health, auto and homeowners. Companies are said to be greedy because they want to make a profit and all that. So why not revolt? Why not start your own “insurance company” that you and your family and friends can use to avoid all of this nonsense?

Imagine some early-twenty-somethings just starting out on their own and entering the work force. They looked at buying health insurance because their employers do not give it, or maybe they are self-employed. Greedy insurance companies charge too much so what they decide to do is start their own pool among themselves. They figure since they are each young, healthy, and not likely in need of too much medical care, they decide that $50.00 a month per person is what the contribution should be. They decide to spread the risk among the group and agree that if anyone does need to go to the doctor, they will pay the bill from the pool of money.

There are five in the group to begin with and each is healthy and willing to participate. After only a year of staying healthy, as these young people are better able to do, they amass $3000.00 for the pool. As it happens, these people are all health conscious, they stay in shape, eat right and try to take care of themselves. As time goes on, some other friends of similar age and health join into the plan and even after a couple of doctor visits for some of the members, in a couple of years they find themselves with $15,000.00 in the account.

An onlooker comments that $15,000 is not that much money at all if some major illness or injury should arise. The members of this group point out that you could still go and get extra insurance elsewhere — or not participate at all if you desire. In addition, they are very careful as to who they allow into the plan.

A 65 year old heart patient who is on medication and who also smokes wants to get into the plan because his insurance is much more than $50.00 a month. He would like to save some money yet get the same coverage he needs. The other members realize that an older, less healthy person such as this would quickly deplete the funds and ruin things for everybody. The 65 year old cries that it is not “fair” and he hires a lawyer to sue for discrimination.

The next day, a cancer patient going through chemotherapy asks to join because he cannot afford to pay for his treatments. He is denied entry into the plan because the members know that such expensive treatments will exhaust the funds so that none of the other members will have money available if they need it. The cancer patient sues because he is being refused insurance due to a pre-existing condition.

Another young healthy person wishes to join the plan. His issue is that he cannot afford to pay the $50.00 per month because he is unemployed yet he still wants to have medical insurance just in case. He is denied entry also because the members all agree that the purpose of starting this pool was to share the risk among the members. Sharing the risk requires sharing the expenses. This rejected applicant says that he will also sue and is now looking for a lawyer that he can get for free.

A judge rules that this insurance pool is acting illegally. He orders that you cannot refuse entry into the plan due to lifestyle choices such as smoking, you cannot penalize someone because they have a pre-existing medical condition, and that it is cruel and greedy to deny someone coverage just because they cannot afford to pay for it.

All of the rejected applicants are now entitled to be a part of the plan. The original members now realize that $50.00 a month is nowhere near enough to pay for the medical care of the new members. They look at the recent health bills from the new members and realize that they must raise everybody’s rates to $5,000.00 per month. This is the estimate based on 1)the new court-ordered medical expenses that must be provided, 2) the fact that some members will be paying nothing into the plan, 3) the lawyer that needed to be hired to defend litigation, 4)the accountant that needed to be hired to keep track of everything and 5) someone to run the whole once-simple operation.

Some of the healthier original members who remember paying $50.00 per month do not think they are getting a good deal so they drop out – increasing premiums even more. It would be “unfair” and “discrimination” to charge different people different rates. Other members complain that $5,000 per month is too much and that the salaries of the greedy employees must be lowered — or that they should be working for free!

Another judge rules that $5,000 per month is “unreasonable” and with the bang of a gavel, disregards the estimated costs that were calculated by the actuaries of this group. Due to the court order and the public outcry of “price gouging”, they may only charge $100.00 per month – unless you can’t afford that much. Within the first month, the plan goes bankrupt and now no one gets any medical care from the plan.

The original member of this plan now shakes his head in disbelief as he sees how far things have spun out of control. Legal requirements of “fairness” along with the perception that he was running some sort of charity both killed his once good and successful idea. Those that could originally pay for their own medical insurance were driven out by the expense of being forced to pay not only for themselves, but also for the expenses of others. People who thought that they were entitled to have someone else pay for them became victorious and the once-great pool of money has disappeared all because people believed that they had the “right” to medical care either for free — or for a price that only they thought to be fair.