forgottenliberty.com

Sorry, No Health Care for You part 1

Sen. Kennedy, one of the chief proponents of government health care reform (aka government takeover of our health care), recently wrote a piece for NEWSWEEK.  In this piece (which I will cover more on in Sorry, No Health Care for You part 2), he wrote about why he thinks government run health care is necessary and why he thinks it is our best and only viable option.  President Obama has also, on an almost daily basis, been on T.V. saying that we must pass this health care bill.  Kennedy and Obama, along with a host of other liberal/statist politicians, claim that only the rich can afford health care.  If you are not rich, then the government plan is the best option for you.  These politicians conclude that if you only have a modest income and do not have great health insurance, then you will not be able to afford health care if someone in your family gets cancer or some other horrible illness…

In his News Week article, Kennedy tries to play on our fears and sympathies by including the obligatory stories about people who can’t afford their child’s cancer treatments because they don’t have insurance.  He then goes on to say that government is the only way these people could afford the treatment.  What he omits is the vast amount of help already available for people struggling with their health care bills including existing state and federal programs and a host of non-government options.  A quick Google search brings up several options such as The Solution to High Prescription Costs, Medical Debt Health and 5 Ways to Lower Your Medical Bills.  I find it hard to believe that these stories liberal politicians, like Kennedy, tell us are completely accurate.

I know there are families who have $30,000 or more in medical bills from their child’s cancer treatment, but when people like Kennedy go on to say that these families have now stopped getting their child treatment because of the cost, I feel like I am being lied to.  Are there actual doctors and hospital in this country who will turn away a child dying of cancer because the family doesn’t have enough money to pay the bills?  This goes against the Hippocratic oath that all doctors take.  Doctors don’t want a child to suffer and die because their family doesn’t have money or insurance.  They will write off certain costs if they are advised of the problem and will set up affordable payment plans.  Most hospitals actually have a dedicated office just for these situations.  The vast majority of doctors don’t become doctors to make lots of money.  They go into medicine to help people and will try everything in their power to help despite the patients ability to pay.  I myself have negotiated with doctors when I didn’t have health insurance, and they were more than happy to lower the costs.

We know that there are many ways to reduce and pay high medical bills, but what about the rising cost of health care that the Democrats claim can only be solved by a government takeover?  There are several options available that will have an immediate impact on lowering health care costs.  One of the most obvious is tort reform, or in other words, a loser pays lawsuit system.  Doctors have been watching their malpractice insurance premiums rise significantly on a yearly basis.  These high costs, which can be over $100,000 a year, have caused some doctors, especially family care physicians, to take an early retirement or to become a specialist in order to make enough money to pay the insurance.  If you have less doctors providing family care, then the law of supply and demand dictates that costs will rise.  Less available doctors plus an increasing number of patients means higher costs.

You will hear many people, mostly trial lawyers, argue that tort reform won’t have a noticeable impact on health care.  Obama himself has said he doesn’t support tort reform, but he is a lawyer so that is to be expected.  What these people don’t realize is that tort reform will do more than just lower malpractice insurance premiums.  It will enable doctors to only order tests and procedures they truly think are necessary.  Right now, if a doctor thinks he knows exactly what is wrong with an individual, he may still order many other tests just to cover all of the bases in case he is wrong.  A doctor doesn’t want to risk a huge malpractice suit because he made an honest mistake.  Therefore, he will order tests that are not necessary just so some lawyer won’t accuse him of negligence or incompetence in a court room.  These extra tests and procedures add greatly to medical costs.  Unfortunately, as long as anyone and everyone can sue a doctor for malpractice and not have to pay the legal fees if they lose, doctors will have to order extra tests and procedures to protect themselves.

I do understand there will be certain situations where people have tried absolutely everything they can to afford their medical bills, including negotiating with doctors and appealing to private charities, and will be forced to declare bankruptcy.  However, by using free market solutions to health care (for some examples click here , here and here), we can dramatically reduce health care costs and reduce the number of people forced into bankruptcy.  I would rather the occasional individual declare bankruptcy than have our federal and state governments go bankrupt because they can’t afford to pay for every American citizen’s health care.  Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are set to go bankrupt if major changes aren’t made.  How will adding the responsibility for 40 million uninsured people’s medical costs in the short-term and every American in the long-term not cause the country to go bankupt?

Related posts:

1. Sorry, No Health Care for You part 2
2. Health Care Bill has Bonus for Trial Lawyers
3. What Gives Them the Right to Make Me Pay for Their Health Care?
4. The Real Reason Democrats Want to Pass Health Care Reform

Click here to subscribe to Forgotten Liberty