“Health Care Reform” Debate Rages On

August 16, 2009 by Bill.

I have two daughters, one 29, the other 31. Neither of them have medical insurance. When they get sick, they first try to tough it out, then they find a healthcare provider that will take them in without insurance, and bill them or take a credit card in payment. They ask for generic prescriptions, and fill them at the cheapest place in town, typically Walgreens.

Ditto for the dentist.

As an aside: I find it interesting that in this whole Democratic health care debate, none of the Senators, Congresspersons, or even POTUS can find time to talk about free dental care for all. Guess that’s not as important, though I can tell you in the majority of cases, my daughters’ health emergencies have been dental in nature, and I’ve covered the bill.

Thank God they haven’t had something dire that required more attention than an Amoxicillin prescription or an extraction.

My daughters are a part of those 48 million who don’t have medical insurance who choose not to purchase it. So naturally, I like the idea of my daughters being able to obtain medical insurance.

I also support the idea of health care for all including immigrants (legal and illegal). Before you get hot under the collar about the illegals consider: They currently go to an ER where they must be treated. I think it would be a whole lot better from a cost perspective if they could go to a regular doctor to get treatment for their sinus infections and pregnancies, don’t you?

What I don’t support is the idea of the Federal government managing a national health care system.

Why? Well, because frankly, the Federal government can’t manage its way out of a paper bag. Can you name a Federal project that was not cost-overrun, did not miss its deadlines, and/or was not laden with pork that added things (at great cost) that should never have been added?

That’s what I thought. You can’t. I can’t. In the 35 years I’ve been watching the leaders in the Federal government, I can’t really point to any one significant project or endeavor that I thought was pulled off with great project management skills, managed well from top to bottom, ended up with the desired result, was pleasing to most people, and actually cut costs.

Yeah, yeah, there are probably some out there. No doubt. But I’m talking about the billion-dollar efforts that politicians paint with grandiose pie-in-the-sky colors and brushes.

Military? Forget it.

Nasa? No hope.

Education? Uh-uh.

Stimulus plan? Really? You’ve got to be kidding.

“Cash for Clunkers” program? A farce. A joke.

No, no. The Federal government should not be trusted with something as precious as our health.

Call me crazy, but I just don’t think the government has innovated anything - well, OK, maybe with the exception of attaching pork projects to bills.

I think health care–including medical research–should stay within the domain of the private sector.

I once worked for a company that developed 3D cardiac ultrasound software which was then bundled in with HP untra-sound scanners. For a lot of reasons, the company went out of business - but I think the company’s executives would admit that the government was a big part of the problem, not the solution.

I’m blessed. My employer provides medical insurance for my wife and I. In fact we have an ala carte plan, with a couple of different providers. I chose Kaiser Permanente (KP).

Let me tell you what I think of this company: As far as I can tell, KP is doing a great job managing their money, and their patients. Oh sure, there are people that will grouse about KP’s care. But let me be honest: I have had a couple of different (relatively minor) surgical procedures, the normal array of sinus infections and flu, and yearly physicals. KP’s doctors have been good about talking with me (not to me), and working with me to solve any health issues that have arisen. They’re responsive and they get the job done. Their equipment is state of the art, their facilities are all over Denver, and, near as I can tell, they’re always fully staffed.

POTUS, in his “town hall” meeting in Belgrade, MT on the 13th said that we should consider an insurance company that’s a great player–one who is working well with the Feds in laying out what the new health care legislation should look like: Aetna.

OK. But Aetna doesn’t run clinics or hospitals like KP, do they? They’re just an insurance company.

Several politicians have advised that we take a look at Cleveland care, because it’s a great example of how well public sector entities can run healthcare. Great, but that’s a couple orders of magnitude example when we’re talking about the Feds running healthcare for millions versus a city for 10s of thousands, isn’t it?

Several people have cited Mitt Romney’s Massacheusetts universal coverage plan, including Mitt himself. However, this  healthcare plan is a disaster. It’s in the red, and stakeholders are panicked about how to fund it going forward.

Lots of people have talked about the danger of a nationalized health care plan for seniors. There has been talk of euthanasia options over clinical treatments, “counseling” the elderly (”You’ve had a good run grandma. Now it’s time to go.) and even letting the elderly suffer without treatment to avoid unnecessary treatment costs. The Rahm brothers like the idea of “life points”–the younger you are, the more points you get. The older you get, well, you do the math.

The Central Barack Station (CBS) cited a CBS/New York Times poll that says this is absolutely not the case. Why, the elderly will be perfectly safe under the new health care plan. In fact, life for them will be better rather than worse!

Right. The New York Times is the most liberal newspaper in the country, employing the likes of the far-left-leaning pundit Paul Krugman. Why would I believe a pollster as far left as that? It cannot be said to be accurate. It simply cannot.

The governor of Montana bragged after the Belgrade town hall that “if they’d send us the paperwork, we’d have this thing knocked out in 10 days.” Yeah, right.

If we’re going to do this thing, we have to have an honest debate, not one riddled with disenguous politicking and Pelosi name-calling. People are scared and they want answers from the Feds.

So, here’s my point: I would be more than happy to chip in an extra $100 - $500 per year in order to help fund healthcare for someone else. I realize that doesn’t sound like much, but given that we have to cover about 1/6 of the people without coverage, I think this is reasonable, and if the health care providers were willing to sit with us, we could craft a decent plan.

And, I think that companies like KP, who have experience in both the clinical and the operational elements of healthcare insurance should manage a national healthcare system. I could envision KP and similar companies working together to provide this kind of healthcare.

And what would be the Federal government’s role?

Sit back, watch, and stay out of the way!

Let Americans do what Americans do best - help other people.

Posted in Health, Politics | No Comments »