Thursday, December 17, 2009

Health Care and Charity Redux

In this morning's Dallas Morning News it was reported that Catholic Charities, a national network of charities, stated that three quarters of its agencies nationwide are experiencing an increased demand for food while its budgets have had to be cut due to a decrease in donations. It was also reported that the Bridgespan Group, an advisor to charities, said that 80 to 100 percent of nonprofits responding to a recent survey have had to cut funding. While expenditures by many charities nationwide have had to be cut because of reduced donations during these hard financial times, demands upon these charities have increased: also due to these hard financial times. In Richmond, Virgina, the Central Virgina Food Bank reports demand is up 50 percent from last year. Additionally, it was reported that the national jobless rate remains near 10 percent, meaning that the demand on charities is unlikely to decline anytime soon.

As Congress continues to debate the $850 billion health care bill, charities nationwide dedicated to the poor and the suffering face closing their doors or cutting services due to dwindling funding. Many of those charities provide free health care services to those unable to pay. While they often do not provide significant medical care, they play a crucial role in keeping health care costs down by treating ailments and illnesses that, if left unchecked, very well could lead to the need for hospitalization. As importantly, they reduce the need by the poor and uninsured to use emergency rooms for treatments easily taken care of in clinics and doctor's offices; a not insignificant health care cost. Many Americans are struggling to keep their jobs and pay their bills. The existence of health care charities and services goes a long way to help ensure that those that lose their struggle will at least have access to free health care. That is, unless national health care chokes them out.

The poor are rarely a segment of the electorate that politicians care about other than to pay lip service. The real prize is the middle class. Despite the rhetoric in Washington of helping the poor and the suffering, National Health Care is about helping the middle class. Many in the middle class might need help, especially those who have lost their jobs and face mounting bills. But it would seem that the best way to help those who have lost their jobs or are having difficulty paying their bills and feeding themselves and their families is not to give them free health care, but to help them get a job. The efficacy of the massive spending by the government to stimulate the economy is still a matter of debate.

Spending $1 trillion dollars on health care seems an unlikely way to go about stimulating the economy, unless one aspires to be in public service or is an out of work health care professional. If one is determined to spend a trillion dollars, they should give it back to the taxpayers. $1 trillion in the hands of consumers would go a long way towards fixing the economy. If it did not lead to everyone in the country getting a job or being able to afford health insurance, it at least might help to increase charitable donations. Better funded charities would alleviate a great deal of suffering and hunger. Moreover, charitable giving not only benefits those in need, but provides an intangible benefit by increasing good will among those who give, as well as those who receive.

Charitable groups can do what the government cannot: provide affordable, effective health care to those who need it. They also do what the government will not, provide service with a minimum of bureaucracy, regulation, and politics. Perhaps this is the real reason why Washington is so determined to pass national health care. If Americans are to receive a service they need and want, it is too often felt that the government should provide that service. If government provides that service, they will get the credit, and the control.

If national health care is passed, the government will gain control over a large and growing sector of our economy. Those who supported it will get the satisfaction of believing they have done something noble and selfless. Those that receive the gift of National Health Care will have the burden of relying upon it for their care. Every one else will just have to settle for paying for it.

In the face of suffering and misfortune, many feel that the least they can do is to support the government in its effort to address that suffering and misfortune. Unfortunately, all too many people are content to do the least they can do.

No comments: