An Obamacare logo is shown on the door of the UniVista Insurance agency in Miami, Florida, on January 10, 2017. (Rhona Wise/AFP/Getty Images)
Tuesday, 27 Jun 2017 01:11 PM
People will die if Obamacare is left intact. And more people will die if Obamacare achieves its ultimate objective, a so-called single payer system, or universal healthcare. That is when the government pays for all your healthcare, when the government decides what is appropriate healthcare for you and then doles out the care.
If you came down with a catastrophic illness which would you rather have, your own private health
insurance coverage or the government deciding on your coverage? Private insurance, like much else in the private sector, can be corrupt which is why it is appropriate for the government to regulate it. But, if you must go to the hospital, your insurance company, and your boss, are more likely to get you the coverage you need than the government which will, without question, ration the care. When the government coverage runs out, as it does with Medicare, you would then be left to die unless you have your own private supplemental insurance coverage. Single payer would restrict access to coverage and Obamacare already has as insurance companies drop out of the market.
The two models that are often held up by advocates of Obamacare as notable examples of socialized medicine are the systems in Great Britain and Canada. Yet those two systems don’t count the numbers of people who have died due to rationing or having to wait too long for care. They don’t keep those stats. They don’t mention the treatments they ban and the doctors they charge with a crime for providing those forbidden services.
If the Obamacare advocates are so concerned about health than why do they oppose lifting the cap on
private insurance accounts? These accounts, often funded by matching funds between employer and employee, are interest bearing accounts and the funds specifically earmarked for insurance and medical expenses. Why are they against cross-state competition for insurance companies and why do they oppose the importation of drugs?
Thee Obamacare lobbyists got mandates for everything from sex change to abortifacients, both of which are boons to insurance companies. The hundreds of mandates that are embedded into Obamacare are the primary cause of the prohibitive cost of premiums. Along with the deductibles, the premiums can be so expensive that it might end up costing as much as ten thousand dollars before you can get a flu shot. The private sector would permit these mandates to become voluntary insurance riders subject to demand.
The Obamacare advocates talk about funds cut for opioid addiction but what does Obamacare offer other than more addictive drugs such as Methadone? Where, exactly do those billions of dollars go? The free market would open the possibility of more organic, safer, more effective and less expensive treatments. The shrill proclaimers that cuts to Medicaid would throw people off insurance fail to mention that many states have expanded Medicaid beyond coverage to the poor which is the original mission of Medicaid. A better economy, and a lowering the cost of insurance once the mandates and other regulations are removed, would go a long way toward helping make insurance affordable to the middle and working class.
Getting rid of a big government program, one that artificially increases the cost of healthcare while in enriches special interests and bureaucrats, would be a historic event. Yet this must be done if we are to save and advance the best medical system known to man and if, as such, we are to save lives. I’m not sure that any such program has ever been scuttled in history without a revolution.
Chuck Morse is a radio host who broadcasts live Thursday's at 10 a.m. ET at WMFO-Tufts. Chuck hosts the podcast "Chuck Morse Speaks" on iTunes and Stitcher and his books are available on Amazon.com. For more of his reports — Click Here Now.