Tough Slog on Healthcare

The Senate today is set to begin debate on health care reform (formerly referred to as national health care). A "tough slog" is expected. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced with firm resolve and sense of mission that "generation after generation has called upon us to fix this broken system." Read and others are determined to succeed where so many have failed. "We are now closer than ever to getting it done."

I have been around for some time and I do not recall the public clamoring for health care "reform" until relatively recently. There was a considerable amount of grumbling perhaps, but the clamoring only began when national health care was put on the table. That aside, continuing with the slight of hand that made the insurance industry the target of reform rather than the health care industry, Reid continued by adding that National Health Care would halt the reprehensible practice by health care insurance companies of providing coverage in a way that allows them to make a profit. In this regard, government provided health care has a distinct advantage. It does not have to make a profit. Indeed, it is prepared to lose billions; a luxury private insurance companies do not have.

There was also chagrin on the part of some like Paul Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change, at those who insist on debating "issues that aren't important to the workability of health reform." The impatience on the part of Ginsberg and other technocrats is presumably due to the insistence by some on limiting or banning abortion coverage, contraceptives, and other controversial issues. To some, the issue of National Health Care is a matter of policy and economics. These are the ones oblivious to the social and political consequences of attempting to provide universal coverage. To them, health care reform is merely a political contest over money and power.

But health care reform is not simply a political or economic contest: it is much more. Health care is an intimate and deeply personal issue to many Americans. An ill or injured sibling, parent, or child is not the same thing as needing to refinance a loan or falling behind on the mortgage. Needing surgery or treatment is not the same thing as needing a new car or a job. There are many, indeed too many, in this country that need help in obtaining and paying for health care. Something should be done. But nationalizing health care is not it. There are other ways, such as subsidizing coverage to enable health insurance providers to cover those who do not make them a profit. The government could take steps to assist the many private charities and foundations that already provide health care to those who need and cannot afford it. However assisting the private sector and charities to meet a need would deny many in Washington the victory, control, and credit they seek. In Washington, is not enough to help people in need. Glory must be had as well.