Is health care a right?

There is no constitutional basis for the assertion that health care is a right.  It is reasonable to expect the government to protect citizens against discrimination if they seek access to health care or health insurance, but having a right to access is not the same as making the government responsible for the provision of such services.  Defining healthcare as a right serves the whims of those in power to manipulate and shape the culture, and can lead to the imposition of limits on personal liberties through regulation and taxation.

The preamble of the Constitution does declare one of its purposes is to “promote the general welfare,” but to suggest this refers to a government responsibility to take care of the needs of each citizen defies reason and the intent of the Framers.  Yet we have legislation moving through congress that not only says government will provide health coverage for citizens, but it will also require citizens to buy health care coverage even if they do not want it.  There is nothing in the Constitution that permits the federal government to mandate the purchase of anything.

Some may justify government expansion into the health care/insurance arena because of the government’s established involvement in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, all of which fall under the umbrella of socialized systems.  Policies and legislation passed under “The New Deal” and “The Great Society” may have had good, though debatable intentions behind them, but such legislation set the stage for increasing the socialistic bent of our nation and culture.  Social programs are not a substitute for personal responsibility, but they can lead to an entitlement mentality where the people sacrifice freedoms to government regulation and control under a mistaken belief that government can solve every problem and answer every need.

Reform yes, government no

Polls indicate that a majority of Americans believe that some reform of health care/insurance is called for, but a majority is also relatively satisfied with what they already have.  In light of this, the approach the current administration and congress is taking with regards to the health care issue is truly astounding.  In essence what they want to do is replace the existing systems rather than fix what is broken.  (If I have a house that has a couple broken windows, needs a new roof, and maybe a new coat of paint I would not tear down the house and rebuild it.  I would make the needed repairs.)  All government remedies offered to this point are intent on rebuilding, not repairing.

Living under the illusion that a central, detached federal government knows best how to manage the health care needs of a family in Ely, Nevada or a retired couple in New Port Richey, Florida confirms a lack of common sense in those who believe such an illusion.  The behemoth bureaucracy necessary to maintain a national system cannot possibly be more efficient than private sector management systems where efficiencies and productivity are driven by competition and a profit motive. 

Excessive executive compensation may exist in the private sector, but at least there is a modicum of transparency.  Has anyone bothered to notice the wealth accumulated by elected officials who tout transparency but craft their legislation behind closed doors?  What is clearly transparent is that our elected representatives obviously disregard the desires of constituents when they vote on bills they do not bother to read.

To place trust for health care/insurance programs in the hands of government commissions and panels makes little sense given the lack of integrity and accountability shown by many elected to office.  The approval and trust levels for Congress are at all time lows and yet a large segment of our population is willing to place seventeen percent of our economy in the hands of a bureaucracy that will surely be built through nepotism and cronyism.

Choices not rights

It defies logic to think that a 2000 page bill is necessary to implement remedies for system inadequacies affecting less than twenty percent of the population.  President Obama has told us repeatedly if we like our current insurance and doctors we will not have to change.  So given the words of the President, under his proposals we have a right to make our own choices.  In reality he wants the government to have the power to make choices that should be determined via the patient-doctor relationship.

Health care is about choices.  Everyone makes decisions that affect their health and quality of life.  Certainly there are those who have existing and/or congenital health issues or problems, and some accommodations should be provided for such circumstances.  However, most health problems people face in America result from personal decisions.  High rates of heart disease, cancer, and diabetes have much to do with lifestyle choices, with obesity being a major contributing factor.  Government entitlement programs do not encourage personal responsibility and little evidence supports the notion that universal health care programs will do anything to improve individual lifestyle choices.

Fix what is broken

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are headed toward insolvency.  The Post Office cannot survive without government financial support.  Apparently the government has not been able to successfully manage these entities.  Why would we place the management of one-sixth of the economy in the hands of another government bureaucracy?  Before going down that road should we not hold the government accountable to fix and manage the existing programs?

Some studies show that eliminating waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid (reportedly $55 billion in 2009 alone) could save tens of billions of dollars.  If Congress simply addressed and eliminated Medicare abuses the people might be willing to support some government involvement in a broader health care domain.  The federal government has not shown an inclination to efficiently and effectively manage the existing bureaucracies of Medicare and Medicaid however, so the public is disinclined to trust the Congress or the Obama administration for determining mandated choices with regard to health care and associated insurance options. The best way for the government to “promote the general welfare” in the health care realm is to ensure every citizen’s right to access is protected.  From my perspective legislation currently under consideration will likely only promote the general welfare of those whose main concern seems to be remaining in office.

Jim O’Brien 11-18-2009

?