Reforming healthcare a necessity?

There is no denying that the healthcare system in our country isn’t perfect, but is the reform bill on the table even taking us towards a change that would be for the better?

President Obama has made it clear that he would like to see his healthcare reform pass this year, however it is clear that this may not be plausible. Many members of the Senate, Republican and Democratic alike, are unsure about pieces of the reform bill and others think we should be focusing our attention and money on other more pressing issues.

It’s obvious, looking at the number of times that this reform has already been turned down, that even the Senators we elected to help make these kinds of decisions are confused by the reform plan President Obama is presenting. I can’t say I blame them for their confusion; the reform bill is 1,900 pages long and written completely in legal jargon.

There are many changes proposed in this bill that I do not agree with. The concept of universalized healthcare is tricky to say the least.

Many people needing medical care are required to place their name on a waiting list, hoping that they will be next to get the care they are seeking. Being given access to a waiting list does not constitute access to good healthcare.

Having to provide funding for everyone to receive healthcare may cut back on the quality of healthcare each individual is able to receive. Also, what will these changes do to the quality and integrity of our healthcare providers?

Another issue to consider when thinking about the healthcare reform in question is whether or not we, as a country, have the money to fund these changes.

When looking through the overview of Obama’s reform bill I noticed a call for billions of dollars to be poured into different programs.

We are already trillions of dollars in debt and making 10% cuts to state budgets for education. This doesn’t really put our government in a position to be paying for everyone’s healthcare and spending billions of dollars on a reform plan that even the Senate is unsure of.

Yes, change is probably needed and inevitable, but perhaps the best approach to take right now is to start over on the reform bill, make it simpler and more concise, and also take into account where the money to fund it is going to come from.

Ronald Forsell

If you have watched the news over the last few months, all you have heard about is the healthcare debate in Washington.  For those of you who have lived under a rock for the last year, or if you just watch reality TV, let me fill you in.  

When people talk about Obama’s healthcare bill, they are actually referring to two separate bills, one in the House of Representatives and one in the Senate. 

 The House bill is a monstrous piece of legislation.  It is 1,990 pages, and over 400,000 words.  When printed it weighs 19 pounds and is nine inches tall. 

Conservative estimates say that it would take a week for the average person to read the bill.  What could possibly be in those 1,990 pages? 

Well the largest part of the bill details the “public option” which is presented as a government “competitor” however, in actuality, the bill will force people into a government run insurance plan. 

This plan has several other facets.  Some of the more interesting parts of the bill include,  page 1925 which makes money available to pay for Native American Sex offender reform, page 1213 forces all vending machines to display health information, and the most odd provision, on page 1255 that sets up a program to reimburse Veterinary students for their college education. 

Just across the Capitol, the Senate has another gigantic bill.  This bill is around 1290 pages. 

This bill is a bit more punitive than the House bill.  This bill would force people to have insurance, and would force businesses with more than 25 employees to provide insurance, or would fine them $750 per employee.  I feel this is incredibly unconstitutional, as the Constitution has nothing in it authorizing the government to force people to purchase anything. 

In addition to forcing insurance on people, the bill also has a public option.  While it has an “opt-out” plan which would theoretically allow states to not enter the government ran plan.  The “opt-out” works in theory, however it would be impossible for most states to pay the fees and fines associated with opting out. 

What is the bottom line in both of these bills?  The Senate bill was scored (government term for a cost estimate) at minimum $890 million and the 1,990 page House bill comes in at $1.3 TRILLION.  How can we pay for either of these plans? 

If these bills pass in the House and Senate, a committee will try and find a compromise between the two which will then need to be approved again, and the President Obama will sign it into law.  Our national debt is currently $11,982,682,139,952.61 we can’t afford to add another couple of trillion to that.

In my opinion, these bills miss the mark completely.  While we need some health care reform, a complete government-run plan will certainly not help Americans.  The main argument in favor of this bill is that the United States has 46 million people without insurance, however the truth is that there are at most 10.6 million citizens uninsured.

Maybe instead of the government-run plan we can allow people to buy insurance across state lines, place limits on frivolous lawsuits, and lastly, allow and encourage people to have health care savings plans.  That is a plan that we can all believe in and one that will truly help America and provide real reform for our healthcare system.