Economics of the Proposed Health Care Bill

A single payer, government-run, reimbursement system would be a reenactment of Medicare for all Americans. It would drive all the private insurance companies out of business because it would be able to sell insurance using the mandate-creating tool of collective bargaining where the government would be the only bidder—that is not something that would increase competition, as the President has said he wants. Furthermore, it would increase total costs as the Congressional Budget Office predicts. This would happen because if the government is supplying free or low-cost health care services, everyone will want some of it; and utilization will necessarily increase. (The CBO estimates that H.R. 3200 would cause a net increase in the federal budget deficit of $239 billion during the 10 year period of 2010-2019.)

Economical Federal Financing--an Oxymoron

President Obama insists that the new health care proposals will not cost the government or the people any more money; he even says it will save money—not likely. If this program is anything like Medicare, which is very probable, it will follow a financial trajectory similar to Medicare. Let’s look at that: Medicare was created about 40 years ago. At that time it cost $7 billion, which was 4% of the federal budget. In 2008, the program cost $455 billion and comprised 15% of the federal budget. (Potetz and Cubanski, Kaiser Family Foundation July 2009)
The lesson is simply that the Federal Government does not know how to run an economical health care system. I think the American people should not believe the President when he talks about an “economical Federal option.”

Unacceptable Things about the Health Care Bill

Our American health care system obviously needs fixing in several areas; but there are two things about the current legislation that are absolutely unacceptable to Pro-Life people countrywide. Those things are provisions for abortion facilitation and the parts of the bills under consideration that would deny the rights of health care providers to obey their consciences. As I read H.R. 3200, I do not see anything that would mandate or facilitate euthanasia.
I am retired from the practice of medicine at this time, but if I were not, I would quit the profession rather than cooperate with a law that required me to facilitate or perform abortions or euthanasia. Physicians are mandated by conscience to do things for patients that help them; and they are not to do any harm. The old Hippocratic Oath, which is no longer in use, specifically proscribed giving a woman anything that would cause her to miscarry a pregnancy.

What Is Quality Health Care

Americans have a different concept of “quality health care” from the providers of that care and, also, from the bureaucrats, both of whom aspire to administrate that “quality” care. The doctors and other health care deliverers would work to deliver the care that produces the best outcome to the individual patient, regardless of the cost. Bureaucrats and administrators would hope to see care delivered that produces the best outcome for the most people at the least cost. They do not necessarily look for ideal care for individual patients.
Patients, on the other hand, usually consider two criteria of care which they deem to be of importance in determining the quality of care they are receiving.
1) Respect of persons: This includes dignity, confidentiality and autonomy of individuals and families to make decisions about their own care.
2) Client orientation: This includes prompt attention, access to social support networks during care, quality of basic amenities, and choice of provider.
Patient expectations are going to suffer if either the provider or the bureaucrats have their way in the new health care laws that are being considered in America today.

A More Practical Solution To the Health Care Crisis

At the present time, employees and union members want very fat health care insurance coverage, because that is income for them on which they do not have to pay taxes. If they were taxed on the cost of their employer-purchased health insurance, they would quit using the employer-purchased option and begin buying their own insurance from private insurers. They would buy catastrophic insurance that had a large co-pay, e.g., $2500 per year. That would encourage them to shop around for lower cost medical services.
This system would help the employer who is struggling to keep up with escalating health insurance costs; and it would keep medical care costs down by creating competition among health care providers.

BOOK REVIEW
Valkyrie
An Insider’s Account of
THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER

One might ask, “Why would a Pro-Life organization like Caring Hands Pregnancy Center tout a book about a failed assassination attempt? Read on….
Valkyrie is a book about the fight men of conscience waged against an evil despotism. It is a story that we can ignore only to our own detriment. Our times are evil; and the dangers of our falling into the trap that Germany fell into in the twelve years of the Third Reich (1933-1944) are very real, indeed!
At the end of the Weimer Republic the German people were under the administration of Kaiser Wilhelm, who had only a counterfeit conservative political position. Inflation was rampant, and the people had great unrest in their hearts—they were dissatisfied, and they blamed conservatism. They were looking for something new. Liberal views had suffused the populace. Liberalism with its overemphasis on individualism, contributed greatly to the dissolution of religious and ethical principles. Liberalism’s mechanistic idea of centralization helped to obstruct any step toward a healthy kind of federalism. This political milieu was a perfect situation for a take-over by a convincing political speaker like Adolf Hitler. The result was horrific! “The speed with which centralism can deteriorate into extreme nationalism is something that we, Europeans, who have felt the worst blows of nationalism, have experienced not only in Germany but in the rest of Europe.”
Many Germans kept aloof of the problems that were escalating in their country during those momentous twelve years. And, finally, when the truth was out and all Germany knew consciously what heinous deeds were afoot, they still remained “neutral.” When the cattle cars of the railroads rattled by their churches on Sunday mornings filled with screaming Jews destined for the extermination camps, their response was, “Sing louder!”
There were, in Germany, however, a class of moral and honorable men of the highest quality who drew together, determined to not let the prevailing madness of the Nazi regime blur their sense of responsibility to their Fatherland and their understanding of right and wrong. These men saw success of the Nazi regime as the end of Christian civilization in Europe. They worked to undo the bad deeds of Hitler and his henchmen. But, unfortunately…they were too few. Their efforts eventually proved their undoing—almost all of them died—with one notable exception, Hans Gisevius, the author of this book.
Now comes the question we must all face: Is the civilization of our nation impregnably fortified against similar outbreaks of imminent evil? Or, are we facing a holocaust of deaths of the innocent while we stand by and shout, “Sing louder!” Are we taking a neutral stand (which is really a strike for centralization, autocracy, and intolerance of Christian principles) or are we willing to stand up and be counted, regardless of the cost?
We will either take the responsibility for our actions or be guilty before God of the German error of 1933-1944.