Is Healthcare Sick?

Recent events demand that our focus is now placed on the “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009” or H.R. 3200. As in my dissection of Cap and Trade, this piece is merely an introduction to the discussion and I will cover the various concerns and provisions in separate articles during the course of this week. As I did with the climate bill, I will use excerpts from the actual healthcare bill to punctuate my comments as well as quotes from both advocates and opponents of the bill.

There is a noticeable uproar over this bill that has been publically aired on network news coverage of the recent town hall meetings. The thousands that have attended these meetings are visibly frightened and upset that the Congress not only appears prepared to pass this legislation regardless of public opposition but that the public opposition itself has become the focus and not the provisions or intent of the bill itself

The protestors have been called crazy, false and manufactured by the Democratic leadership with one Congressman, Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) actually referring to his anti-healthcare reform constituents as “Nazi Brown Shirts”. What is going on here? Since when has the voice of the American people become a threat to democracy? Apparently, that has only happened since the voice of the people now disagrees with the intentions of Congress.

It seems that none of the people that want to see this bill pass are willing to discuss the merits of the bill nor are they are prepared to answer the hard questions posed by Americans that are afraid that the level of care they currently receive will be diminished and that the Federal Budget and deficit will explode.

Undeniably there are myths and untruths that are being promulgated about what is contained in the bill that range from the dismantling of the private health insurance system to the establishment of a “death panel” that will determine care based upon the value of the person seeking it. These are serious charges that should be answered.

I will be the first to admit that the bill contains no language that will outlaw private care in favor of a national healthcare system nor does it contain language that calculates care levels based on the worth of the patient. However, the dangers that people fear the most are not what the bill says, but what it doesn’t say.

The bill for the most part is an open framework of goals with many of the details for care and how that care will be administrated left to a committee that will be formed by the legislation. That sounds too much like a blank check for my taste. “Let’s pass this thing first and then I’ll tell you what it will do for you later.”

The first myth I wish to dispel is that our healthcare system is broken and in dire need of reform. The portion of healthcare that is seriously in jeopardy is the part that the Federal Government already controls; Medicare and Medicaid. These programs have been broadened since their inception to cover people outside of the intent of the original legislation. As the cost for care climbs, the Federal Government assesses the overall cost of the program and must increase funding levels or adjust the reimbursement rate for healthcare providers. In essence, dictate what these doctors will be paid for their services regardless of the value of that treatment.

That has affected the cost of private insurance. As the Feds reduce their rates for reimbursement for services, the losses that the hospitals and doctors realize after treating patients under Medicare and Medicaid must be passed on to other people that possess private insurance or pay directly for services.

The other loss that is passed on to privately insured patients covers the cost of government mandated indigent care for which there is no Federal reimbursement. Indigent care was originally seen as a matter of conscience, prohibiting hospitals from denying critical services until the patient’s ability to pay was verified. I agree that our society should never be comfortable with anything so barbaric as to deny life saving care. However, this mandate has serious consequences for a nation that refuses to secure its borders. The people that abuse this mandate of mercy are overwhelmingly illegal immigrants to this country and have developed a culture of using the emergency room in place of a primary care physician because they can get the care they need and fade back into the shadows of society while the bills are still being printed.

Before anyone has the chance to comment on that, I want to make it clear that I do not oppose immigration. This nation was made great by the diversity of cultures that call this land their home. I do however, oppose criminal activity at any level and that includes those that would cross our borders by eluding the mechanism already in place that allows them to do so lawfully. Those individuals exploit our nation’s generosity with impunity.

One week may not be enough to cover all the aspects of this bill let alone the reasons the Federal Government is so adamant that it must be passed or the reasons that the public overwhelmingly rejects it. I will play the timeline by ear as the news will undoubtedly add new issues to discuss in the coming days.

What I do plan to address are the questions on everyone’s mind.
1- What is really broken and why?
2- Is the public option (or whatever they are calling it now) a Trojan horse to Universal care?
3- Are there “Death Panels” within the plan?
4- How does this affect my privacy?
5- Will this plan really reduce healthcare costs and if so, how?

I have agreed to take on the single most important event on the political horizon for years to come. All that I ask of you is not to take my word for any of it. In fact, take no one’s word for it. Uncover the facts for yourself with a clear and open mind and form your own opinions based on the truths you discover. The truths are harsh so make sure you can handle the truth before you dare ask the questions.

See you tomorrow,
Paul