Universal health care is not free

Government-run universal health care always becomes rationed health care!

There are many positive aspects to the American health care system. In fact, Minnesota has been ranked the healthiest state in the nation 11 out of the last 18 years. Even so, there are a number of people advocating a massive overhaul of our system to provide so-called universal health care. No one opposes covering everyone; the real question is, how can we best do it?

Those who think that the "sky is falling" in the health care arena argue that the only way to ensure that health care costs are contained and that all individuals have access to affordable health care is to put the government in charge. They claim that if the government ran the health care system, set the prices and paid all the bills, then everyone would get what they wanted and needed when they needed it, and it would be free!

Rationed care is unacceptable

But since when has anything ever been free? There is no instance in which a government has run a health care program more efficiently than the private sector. The only way universal health care can adequately address rising health care costs is by limiting available care. Rationing of care is not an acceptable health care delivery principle, nor is it an appropriate way to contain heath care costs. Read about the often vaunted Canadian Health Care system from a physician who has lived and worked within that system.

Think about it! If you were diagnosed with cancer, would you go to a doctor who was the low bidder in providing your treatment? Universal care ensures that everyone gets the same care but it is all at a much lower level.  In order to control the cost quality would be reduced to what everyone could afford. Doctors would be required to only use what the government determined was the "best practice" to treat your case, even if it didn't work for you. They would be punished by not being reimbursed for treatments that were not a listed "best practice." What if you are allergic to the best practice drug?

Private fee-for-service prohibited

On top of all that, you would not be allowed to purchase treatments that would not otherwise be provided, because that would not be fair to those who could not afford to do so. This is called "private fee-for-service." Canadians and citizens of many other countries with universal coverage are not allowed to purchase additional care. That is why so many Canadians come to the U.S. for medical care, even though they have so-called "free" universal health care.

Health care is a complicated issue. There are a number of different solutions to address future challenges as the average age population continues to grow older. Health care will always be labor intensive and costly, because it is personalized to the individual. There are times in our life when we use a lot of health care and times when we don’t. Increasingly, phyicians are called upon to make treatment decisions based on their perception of a patients quality of life and age.   Increasing eligibility for government programs doesn't ensure that more people will have adequate health care

The Minnesota Department of Health estimates that approximately 59% of the 383,000 Minnesotans without insurance are currently eligible for government assistance, but for one reason or another, aren't enrolled. Many of these individuals choose not to have health care. Forcing them to enroll in government programs only spreads limited resources too thin to provide adequate coverage and leads to rationing.

Ever increasing taxes will force limits on health care

The problem with socialized medicine is that the government’s budget is finite. As health care costs will continue to rise faster than the rate of inflation, and baby boomers begin to enroll in Medicare in larger numbers, the government will have to decide whether to raise taxes or cut benefits. Neither of these "solutions" is easy and will only continue to get more difficult. Rationing is the most likely consequence if we rely solely on government funded health care.

Those who think the price tag for socialized medicine is manageable should look to Minnesota’s neighboring state of Wisconsin. In 2007, the Wisconsin Legislature proposed a universal health care bill. The price tag: an additional $500 per month per taxpayer! Fortunately for our neighbors to the east, the legislation did not become law. Unfortunately, our neighbors to the north are not so lucky. Canadians pay a significant amount for their government-run care and still have long waits and rationed care. That is not free!

Abortion’s affect on health care: 50 million missing taxpayers 

Ironically, at the same time approximately 75 million baby-boomers begin to enroll in social security and Medicare benefits, over 50 million potential taxpayers have been aborted who would otherwise would have offset the cost of baby-boomers’ benefits! As the abortion mentality continues to permeate American culture, the greater effect will be felt in the economy. Except for immigration, the United States would have a falling population and the problem is even worse in Europe, Russia, India and other parts of the word. What's more, the current Universal Health Care bills before Congress would include free abortions for everyone making matters even worse!

Government control of medical technology = Rationed care

The real reason health care costs are rising is because health care is getting better. Americans are unwilling to sacrifice better care and technological developments just because they are expensive. Rather, they look to market forces to drive costs down. This is what we have seen with the Lasik surgery technology. Initially it was very expensive, but as demand for the procedure continued to rise, the costs have continued to go down.

The reality is that technological advances cost money to develop. The amount spent on health care is partially determined by how frequently these new technologies are utilized. Technological advances are also costly because they allow for more specialized, effective care geared to the individual. Diseases affect each person differently, and these differences must be addressed in order for health care to be effective. The more people benefit from technology, the more Americans will spend on health care. Paying more for better health care is not really a bad thing.

Unfortunately, if we shift to universal, single-payer health care there will inevitably be limited numbers of doctors and limited access to technology because the government will only be able to afford a finite amount. Some legislators talk about a "medical arms race" where cities and municipalities are trying to spend more money on the best advances. They think this is a bad idea and want to limit the amount of technology that can be accessed in a given region. Supposedly this will reduce costs. In reality, it results in limited doctors, limited access, and long waits by patients—a form of rationing.

When access to medical technology is restricted, care is ultimately rationed—especially for the poor, vulnerable, and disabled.

However noble the goal to provide all Americans with adequate health care, mandating the government to pay on the backs of taxpayers is not the type of reform that will ensure everyone receives the care they need. Government-run, socialized medicine can only lead to rationed care.

There are better alternatives that can provide health care for all:

• Fee-for-service: Protecting an individual's right to use their own money for health care costs not covered by insurance is essential to avoid health care rationing.
• Expanding access to the private market: We can help individuals enroll in adequate health care programs by offering subsidies to enable all Americans to access insurance in the private market based on their ability to pay.

Call or email your Congressman and Senator and tell them we can't afford free government run health care that has resulted in reduced quality and rationing in every country that has adopted it. 

(Members of Congress have their own health care plan with virtually unlimited benefits.  They would enjoy these benefits for life even under universal health care.  Ask them to include themselves in the universal health care program if they want to vote for it.)