Health Care

I've been reading a lot about the health care legislation of late, which is not surprising, given that it is one of Mr. Obama's priorities. I'm thinking there are some things that need to be said that aren't being said with regard to this legislation.

First and foremost is "What's the hurry?" Our health care system could use some improvement, I'll grant you, but a complete overhaul with over 1000 pages of legislation that some of our elected officials, like Mr. Conyers, will not even read before casting their vote? (A notion I find appalling as, in my understanding, that is the job of our elected legislators, to read and understand proposed legislation before voting on it. Mr Bilbray is with me on this one.) I understand that the republicans (not to be confused with conservatives) have come up with a different health care reform plan that is unlikely to even see the light of day, thanks to the changes in procedures enacted shortly after the democrats took control of both houses.

It seems to me that we are not even framing the debate in correctly. First one must define the problem. All I am hearing in the MSM is that the problem is that health care costs too much and that the free market didn't work for health care. In my experience we don't have a free market system in health care so how could it affect anything?

I recall shortly after moving about 10 years ago that I was incensed that I could not get a straight answer to a few simple questions when I was looking for a new doctor. Those questions? "How much does it cost for an office visit with each of the doctors who are currently accepting new patients?" and "How much does it cost for a throat culture?" Only one of the health care businesses I called could answer those questions. They were a family practice. (By which I mean a family of doctors who had set up their own offices.) and I only called them because they they were mistakenly on the list of local in-network providers given to us by my husband's new employer.

How can we call this a free market? How would you shop if the salesclerk in a grocery store refused to tell you how much anything cost until after you had purchased it, taken it home and consumed it? That's essentially what most in-network service providers do. They say they have no choice, because different insurance plans cover different things at different percentages and the prices are set by someone else and on and on and on. (Gov.'t regulation plays a part in that as well.) Even when I provided them with the name of my husband's new employer and the insurance carrier, these clinics were unable to provide that basic level of consumer information. (The private practice didn't deal with insurance and made a point of saying that they would have to charge me more because it would cost them more clerical time to get their payment from my insurance - and they were able to tell me how by how much my cost was increased.)

I think if we made clinics publish their prices for various services (Please note I did not say have the government set their prices), that consumers could bring down health care costs pretty quickly through informed decision making and free market competition.

The second issue that really has an affect on health care prices is tort reform. By this I mean that the cost of malpractice insurance has become so prohibitive that many doctors simply cannot afford to continue to practice. If we limit the damages that can be awarded for liability, this would have a huge affect on the cost of health care.

Neither of these solutions would require the federal government to have a mandatory medical database containing the medical records of each and every American citizen with no opt out for those who don't care to share that information with whatever government employee has access and time on their hands. They would not require government rationing of health care or government guidelines on who can be treated or for which treatments are allowable for which people. (Wouldn't want to waste money treating old people or people with incurable diseases-they're going to die soon anyway-right?) Nor would they require huge tax increases or affect current medicare or medicaid programs.

Our form of government is designed to let our legislators deliberate, slowly and carefully before voting on legislation that affects the American people. What crisis is requiring such a push now? Why in the world should a bill this size and this costly to the American people be voted on virtually without review and debate, much less passed?

"To me belongeth vengeance and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste." ~Deut 32:35