Richard Nixon sought to bring universal health care to Americans in a 1974 bill that was opposed by Edward Kennedy, now 36 years later–Richard Nixon’s vision has become fact.
It is fundamentally wrong to pass a law requiring the U.S. public to pay corporations for health insurance. Democracy sometimes must directly provided satisfaction of its vital interests without benefiting special interests.There are many things wrong with treating private corporations as if they were public institutions-too numerous to mention yet I will offer several for illustrative purposes.
Supply and demand on pricing is corrupted by manditory legal requirements for insurance of all citizens. If corporations do not make enough money they can go out of business. Too much private data is given to the corporate world. Alternative methods of delivery medical care such as co-opts for communities are, a priori, disadvantaged as redundant.
Medicare and Medicaid should never have served as universal providing of insurance for large numbers of citizens. In the future the expansion of either may bring large numbers of poor but health youth and perhaps former illegal aliens into those systems adding unforeseeable new debt following any corruption of passing amnesty bills to reward those breaking the laws for the most time. Such prices with equity could be passed for tax evaders giving amnesty for those breaking the laws much and penalizing those breaking the laws just a little for a year or two.
A national medical service for the poor was the best way to provide the most medical service to the poor at the lowest cost. The Democratic Party lost legislative, intestinal fortitude after 9-11, and the end of the cold war.They do not stand up for democracy as opposed to corporatism–for fear of being labeled by the ignorant as socialists. Democrats act as if Sen. Joe McCarthy wad their political science professor so they must err to the extreme right or risk an ‘F’. In Democracy, the people can freely establish institutions to provide to satisfy vital interests of people that cannot provide for themselves–such as health care for the poor. What they should not do is establish corporatist-socialist structures such as require citizens to pay particular private entities money.
Corporatism and universal corporate health insurance requirements are the best pheasable methods of developing universal oppression of individual liberty and democracy in the United States today.
Expansion of the V.A. hospital systemto include free treatment of the poor and illegal alien residents would create a vital functioning national emergency medical care infrastructureable to responnd at the lowest cost to national disaster. The poor could use the facility easily without strings or ongoing paperwork.
Obama care will require new bureaucracies to administer the tens of millions of people not enrolled as well as to verify the financial information of individuals applying for services. Some will receive somewhat degrading service conditions potentially for using programs that had before perhaps been reserved for the elderly in order to receive medical treatment. Illegal aliens by the millions will of course continue to use emergency rooms and stay off the federal paperwork all together. The debt will be passed along to citizens through higher health coverage charges.
One must believe th the driving force for the Obama Medical Plan is the desire of the middle class to have a free lunch, and the unwillingness of the rich to provide adequate health care for working people. As the quality of medical care increases the middle class want to exploit it all such as is available to the rich–they can’t afford that and do not save enough, buy too large of homes the government must step in to save from mortgage defaults and deflation of value by the trillions, and but large wasteful of fuelo S.U.V.s by the two or threes per home–that lifestyle requires more than they can afford so the Democratic party and the Republicans too borrow trillions from abroad to fund their corrupt political economy.
It is likely that such an impractical lifestyle over time will result in the continuing decline of U.S. national independence. There are substantial reform steps possible such as I suggested above would work for squaring away the poor, and then the middle class could approach its not-altruistic desires for cheaper medical coverage for itself, apart from the obscurantism of providing medical coverage for those of us that have had to barter away a home lot for surgery, and then seek to avoid recurrence of the same injuries on the job, self-employed without insurance the next few years until becoming aged enough for Medicare coverage perhaps.