The Great American Health Care Insurance Debate - Four Questions

The country is currently involved in the Great American Health Care Insurance Debate (or should that be "Uniquely American"?). And it's a good thing - finally, folks are getting upset enough to yell at their congressional representatives, which is always a good thing. There's plenty to talk about.

But the debate revolves around the wrong approach to health care reform. The talks I've heard are about creating more insurance profits, via required enrollments and a new, government-run insurance company. What does that have to do with improving health care quality or expanding the access to everyone?

The only bill before Congress that makes sense to me is H.R. 676, which calls for government-run health care. No more insurance bureaucracies. There are plenty of international models to choose from that seem to work. Ongoing international health emergencies and declining quality of health resulting from the decades-old single-payer/government-run approach in these nations does not exist.

Yet H.R. 676, creating a government-administered single-payer system, is being ignored and/or pooh-poohed by the Democratic Party, the Obama Administration, and most of the mainstream media.

My view: it is unethical to turn the citizen's health options and choices into a profit center for a few major corporations. The welfare of the citizens is the welfare of the nation. What does it say about our "uniquely American" values that we are willing to allow life-altering health decisions to be determined, in large part, by the amount of dollars we can afford for insurance?

If you don't have enough money, you can always die? The Great American Health Care Insurance Debate is about preserving a business whose profits rely on providing the least amount of services for the most amount of money it can charge.

Surely it's just a matter of education. Unfortunately, in the Great American Health Care Insurance Debate, the facts and results of years of international single-payer style programs around the world seem to count for nothing. No need to look past our own borders - we've got a good system, it just needs refinement! The reality that the USA is about the only nation on the planet driving its citizens into health-care related bankruptcies is a concept other countries cannot understand. That's how advanced our system really is - no one else uses it because it baffles them.

Since actual performance data is disregarded, that means citizens must get their info from other sources - like politicians and activist groups (forget using television news-tainment - the major health care players all buy ads there). But there's the rub.

The health care industry is spending hundreds of millions in direct congressional lobbying right now. Who do you think is getting heard by the Congress, the many voters or the few people with millions in political contributions? And many of the netroots groups that have sprung up to decry any reform have confirmed links to insurance/hospital companies. Seems like a one-sided information stream.

Industry-sponsored groups are not unethical; but some of these activists for the status quo are urging followers to practice locally what the television and talk radio spheres have engaged in for years: (sing like Groucho Marx) "Whatever you're for, I'm against it!" Simple, and simple-minded, naysaying as its being practiced can effectively curtail discussion and learning.

Aiding and abetting this purposeful obfuscation are our elected legislators. There seems to be little effort to jointly craft health care reforms that would help all citizens. There seems to be maximum efforts expended to use this major initiative as:
- A political club to swing at the opponent - both Republicans and Democrats alike. It's the latest skirmish line in the ongoing battle: one wing holds the power while the other wing fights to get it back. Keep saying outrageous things, it's part of the strategy!
- A diversion to keep the discussion away from the single-payer model used by most of the rest of the planet. Keep those massive political contributions from that sector rolling in!

Apparently it's a lot to ask Americans to take the time to reflect on the right thing to do, engage in research, and have rational discussions with their friends, relatives, legislators about real health care reform. There are no role models here. Our politicians don't do it, the majority of radio and television talking heads don't do it, and apparently some activists instruct their adherents not to do it.

That's a reality that must change if meaningful and effective reform is to occur. I'm glad folks are talking; now let's talk about facts.

These are the questions I keep asking, but I haven't gotten any answers:

Why is the current talk focused on creating more insurance entities and not improving the quality of health care and providing access to all?

Why is the health-care model used in other industrialized countries around the planet purposely ignored/denigrated by the government and the mainstream media?

Why would we continue to preserve the health insurance business, whose profit is determined by rationing life-impacting health services and charging financially back-breaking rates when it can?

Why are we afraid of trading in a broken system for one that provides betterment for all citizens in this most important of all issues, the physical health of the United States?