CNN iReport

It’s simply staggering what the US has been able to achieve in just over 200 years of independence.  After all, England was once the biggest empire with a history spanning 2000 years.  Yet it’s been reduced to a country where the minority have a cell phone plan with unlimited evening and weekend minutes.  And when riding on a school bus is merely of a child’s imagination, it’s not exactly a country to be envied.  To what is such a disparity owed I asked myself while living in England, especially when it’s the 5th largest economy in the world?  I found the answer lied in the comparison of Capitalism vs. Socialism.

When bureaucrats are in charge of an industry, salaries don’t rely on profits, which makes innovativeness and efficiency low on the priority list.  The result is a very cost ineffective service, plain and simple. This forces the government to tax society disproportionately heavy, relative to the service it’s able to provide them.  That’s why as a country gets more socialized, quality of life tends to go down.  In the case of England’s healthcare for example, everyone technically is provided government coverage.  That coverage, however, comes in exchange for heavy taxation like sales taxes which approximate 17.5% and outrageous public television taxes.  Still, for so many that coverage is pointless since the government service can be so inaccessible.  In England, the wait list under the government run system specifically to see a dentist is 6 months.  People often simply cannot wait and end up paying for care out of pocket, essentially paying twice for the same service.  Canada is the only exception to the rule in which people get universal health coverage while taxes approximate that of the US.  Providing healthcare unfortunately exhausts the government’s budget to the point it has little money left for programs like defense and space exploration, things most Americans consider vital.

In a free market system, if an entity/business earns very high profits, someone else inevitably comes along and offers the same service/product for less.  Ultimately, it’s a system which corrects itself in ensuring people get their money’s worth, so to speak.  It’s the foundation of the American economy.  This gives everyone a chance to provide a service, without being muscled out by the government.  So if you didn’t know already, now you know what makes America globally referred to as the Land of Opportunity.

This begs the question then, why did England, France, Eastern Europe, and so many others adopt such a way of life?  Why didn’t they just embrace capitalism like we did?  Easy.  Government leaders who sought power charmed people into believing wealth results only from greed, corrupt practices, and unfair advantages so money should be rightfully taken away from the rich, and that money should then be re-allocated to every individual.  It’s as if to say, ordinary people are never corrupt.  But since the vast majority of any population aren’t rich, such rhetoric sounded attractive.  The masses of people were enchanted by leaders who told them free enterprise and lack of regulation has led them to be disenfranchised.  If the government controls everything, it will ensure fairness and equality, they were told.  But yet, every socialized country suffers with homelessness just like ours.

Ask any economics professor, and you’ll get the same answer; anytime government intervenes into an industry/sector the total cost to society goes up.  Or simply just ask anyone and they’ll tell you there’s no free lunch, yet if you tell them they will get something for free, they are still inclined to vote yes.  We just so desperately want to believe there’s a free lunch out there.

And this brings us to the issue of Health Care.... a sector in which our President now wants to get deeply involved.

For those fixated on America spending 1.5x on healthcare as any other nation but not having longer life spans, realize that in Europe patients sleep behind curtains, with one nurse for ten patients.  This may not affect outcome, but it does make life inconvenient.  No other country deals with our obesity pandemic either, or is burdened with the rampancy and scope of our medical malpractice claims.  No other country will attempt to deliver a fetus as early as the US does in order to preserve the maximum number of lives.  Instead, they let them go and refer to the result as “fetal demise.”  The World Health Organization manipulates the infant mortality statistic and calls us 29th, despite us having the most advanced neonatal care in the world.  And sure there is clearly some fraud and waste in our system which we should take measures to reduce.  It’s unimaginable any system, especially one run by the government to be free of fraud and waste, though.

So if you ask me, all factors considered, the cost of healthcare in the US is a pretty good value compared to what the rest of the world gets.

But still, with many Americans uninsured, and while costs remain on the rise, it’s not good enough, which means we need reform.  As a side, it’s important to note why costs are rising even though healthcare providers are virtually the only profession to have seen only a minimal pay increase in decades, with some earning less.  Lack of constraint on malpractice suits forcing doctors to run excessive tests, the increasing prevalence of obesity, and the fact that healthcare continually has more to offer, are a few of the main reasons.  Our administration would rather us all believe the only reason is insurance company greed, perhaps as an effort to make a potential hostile takeover of the private system sound convincing.

The debate regarding healthcare reform is essentially over the question: Should the government be in control, or should society be in control?  In other words, Socialism or Capitalism?  And hence, the reason Healthcare reform in our country has become a huge matter of politics.

So let’s examine the main contenders: HR 3200(ObamaCare) versus HR 3400(GOP Reform).

HR 3200 is the Democratic proposal written by President Obama, aka ObamaCare which bears a $1 trillion price tag.  It’s a 1017 page doctrine full of ambiguous and incoherent language available in pdf format online at http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf , which essentially calls for a total overhaul of our entire health care system along with a massive expansion of government to regulate it.  Patients will carry around a card to be swiped like a credit card in offices and hospitals, while a computer reads if a patient’s particular government policy covers a service or not.  Unlike with an insurer, this decision has no appeal.  One thousand seventeen pages of legislation, yet doesn’t address anywhere, essentially the largest issue concerning inflated health costs: lawsuit abuse.  It’s one of the many key indicators of Pres. Obama’s complete partisan scam.  Perhaps, since trial lawyers make up a huge part of the democratic base, Pres. Obama didn’t want to offend them.

More specifically, the proposal allows the federal government to subsidize health plans (called public option plans that choose one’s doctor, hospital, and even day of appointment), putting the government in direct competition with private insurers, potentially driving them out and socializing our entire healthcare structure.  Although the inclusion of public options into healthcare reform recently failed to get Senate approval, the Democrats vow to reintroduce them, so it is important to understand their potential impact.  It will drive down costs because we’ll pay for it from rich people’s pockets President Obama says, which in the end is the perfect sales pitch to the masses as we’ve seen from countries having socialized much of their industry.

The public options plans for sale are described on pages 84-85 as Basic, Enhanced, Premium, and Premium-Plus.  Interestingly enough, specifics regarding cost, deductible amounts, and coverage aren’t mentioned at all other than dental and vision being included only in the Premium-Plus plan.  But the president so eloquently insists he is going to provide all Americans with quality healthcare.

Let’s stop for a moment and be realistic.  Are any of the 46 million uninsured Americans really going to buy a government plan to save a few bucks?  Probably not. They will have to buy some form of insurance though.  That’s because the proposal comes with legislation making it against the law to not own health insurance.  So then who will buy these plans?  Big corporations will buy them to save money once an employee’s plan is up for renewal, meaning their employees will lose their existing doctor.  President Obama just reinforced this notion himself in his recent address to Congress when he explained “The Congressional Budget Office estimates only 5% of the uninsured will buy a public option plan.”   He goes on to argue that a government option is merely a necessity to set a cost and quality standard to which private insurers must compete.  He further argues that private universities do very well, while competing with public ones.  His arguments in theory might hold true if a person were buying health insurance for themselves.  But since most health insurance is bought by an employer for an employee, the obvious choice is the cheapest one. In this case, a subsidized public option plan to which no private company can reasonably compete.

In fact, every claim I’ve heard Pres. Obama make regarding his healthcare proposal seems to be dubious at best according to his proposal’s language, and this includes his claim that illegal immigrants won’t get healthcare. Sure sounds like it if you read page 50.  But then again, your guess is probably as good as mine in terms of what he means by “...relating to genetic information non-discrimination...”  And he now goes by the 46 million Americans estimate instead of his initial 40 million estimate a few months ago when referring to the uninsured population. This is important because 37 million is the actual White House and US Census estimation of those who are nonimmigrants without health insurance.  Further, there are an estimated 9 million uninsured immigrants (it is not known what percentage are here illegally).  That puts the total uninsured including illegal immigrants right at 46 million.

Regardless, the proposal’s language is no doubt convoluted, raising serious red flags about a man’s honesty, who repeatedly tells us we need transparency in government.   

Initially, the President told us public option plans would be subsidized by tax payers money.  He clearly articulated this in response to a question at his Colorado town hall where he said “If we keep pouring more and more tax payer money into the plans, it will be at a greater cost to society.”  He went on to articulate “I think we can craft a way...” referring to his public option plans having to borrow money for interest it’s source of capital, operating separately from the federal government in order to provide fair competition against the private sector.  It seems since that proved to be unpopular, he’s now entirely shifted his premise to say they won’t be subsidized.  Okay, in that case, then for what does the proposal still require an extra $900 billion on top of the proposed $500 billion in cuts to Medicare?  I can’t even fathom how a question of this magnitude can remain unanswered.  He also just recently stated in his address to Congress, “While there remains some significant details to be ironed out...”  A 1017 page proposal, yet the basics haven’t even been ironed out.

Meanwhile, the mainstream media seems reluctant in elucidating any of the above mentioned.  Or maybe when public networks initially rejected Pres. Obama’s prime time specials based on lack of popular demand, his threats to create FCC fees on public broadcast has been more impacting than we think.

Let’s move on to HR 3400, aka The Empowering Patients First Act, available in full text at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3400.  It’s also available in a very easy to read summary at: http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_EPFA_Three-Page_Summary--FINAL.pdf.  Let me guess?  You haven’t heard of HR 3400?  That’s because the Democrats have done a brilliant job at hiding it.

It’s a clear and coherent 63 page document proposed by the GOP, written by Congressman and Surgeon Tom Price.  Unlike ObamaCare, it does in fact address lawsuit abuse, as well every major identifiable problem with our healthcare system in a simple 4 pillar manner that would give affordable coverage to every American while preserving everything that’s good about our health care system. It reforms the medical liability system while the cost of the plan is completely offset through decreasing defensive medicine, ferreting out waste, fraud, and abuse to name a few ways.

That’s right, it doesn’t cost a penny.  So why haven’t we heard more about it?  It’s because Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats have conspired with Pres. Obama to confiscate the proposal and keep it quarantined while they keep shoving their own proposal down our throats at town halls and press conferences, pretending as if the only other option is the status quo because Republicans haven’t put anything forward.

As I recall, President Obama campaigned very heavily that big corporations were getting too many tax breaks and that corruption on Wall Street needed to be addressed.    Fiscal responsibility is important in a President, he belabored. Yet one of the very first things he did as President was reward financial CEOs with multibillion dollar bonuses right from the pockets of tax payers. This, to people after they bankrupted their own companies while defrauding investors, all for personal financial gain.  Perhaps, the CEO bonus money was related to financial institutions having given Barack Obama more than three times the money they contributed to John McCain’s campaign...some food for thought.