Misinformation

Today in the mail I got the gift of blog-fodder from Senator Tim Johnson. It was under the guise of clearing up all the misinformation regarding health care reform. So I'd like to offer some quotes from the addendum to his previous party-line release on health care reform along with a few comments about what's wrong with this picture.

In response to the question about why we should want reform when we already have the best care in the world Johnson says we do indeed have the best health care in the world "if you can afford it." He refers to an increasingly large number of people discover they are under-insured and makes the case this is a reason for reform.

Okay. I agree that the current course we are on in the financial side of health care is unsustainable. But is this a problem the governments needs to solve? In a free market health insurance providers will have to compete for the dollars of the average American. If the average American can't afford their rates, guess who doesn't get paid? That's right, the health insurance provider doesn't make much when nobody buys their insurance. That's what a competitive and free market is all about. So what's going to happen if we toss the government into this mix? Well, the government has no reason to keep costs down since they don't have to worry about competing or making money. So, eventually, the price goes up. Unfortunately that gets paid by raising taxes. So maybe it starts out reasonable but where will it be in ten years? Besides, if a person is under-insured, how is that the government's problem? It's my responsibility to make sure I have insurance I need.

On to the second issue in the letter. "I like the coverage I have now. How will I benefit from health care reform?" Johnson's response to this is a rich one. Here's his response: "Reform efforts will build upon the strengths of our health care system while fixing the parts that prevent so many from accessing affordable, quality health care. Health care reform will ensure that you and your family will have the secure and meaningful health care coverage you deserve."

Where do I begin? This is a sales pitch. What is health care reform? Why it's whatever you want it to be! Is a senator speaking or Willy Wonka? Raise your hand if you really believe this. Unfortunately, even if it was true, we still have a whole new set of problems sure to arise from the solution.

Third: "What is the difference between a public insurance option and a government takeover of health care?" Good question. Johnson's response: "A public option would simply be a government insurance plan that people could choose if they liked it better than the private insurance plans available to them. . . . This public option would exist side-by-side with the health insurance plans offered by a private plan that best suits their needs."

Right. Of course that's only until the government plan runs the private companies out of business and forces a more complete government takeover. This is the frustrating part about this debate on the democrat side of the aisle. I believe they know full well what this will do and that end-result is exactly what they want. They're just not man enough to admit it. Instead they desire a back-door approach. Force the crisis and then the country will cry out for us to take it over. Sounds like the housing crisis to me. An awful lot of that appears contrived as well. So maybe this tactic isn't so new. Don't worry, they'll blame it on the republicans when it happens anyway.

Fourth: "With our economy struggling, how can we afford health care reform?" Another real good question. His response: "Reform will undoubtedly be costly - but it is even more costly to do nothing." Oh, and I like this part: "In 30 years, one third of our nation's wealth will be spent on health care."

Wow. In 30 years? How can we solve this problem??? I know, let's commit one third of our wealth to it now! That way it won't be such a shock 30 years from now. After all, there's no possible way the free market system could possibly work well enough to fix this problem before then.

Well, all I can say is this: we can't solve a problem that comes in 30 years by the destruction of our nation today. If we commit these resources (unnecessarily) now, we may not have a nation to save in 30 years. And by saying "may" I think I'm being generous.

Fifth: "In an effort to cust costs, will the government begin rationing health care?" His response: "No, but we can cut costs by making smart choices about what works and avoiding unnecessary and ineffective treatments." Now that's a dim response. If you like that one, you're sure to enjoy this one: "The payments we make to providers have surprisingly little to do with patient outcomes. By paying better for good patient outcomes, we encourage providers to share test results with one another instead of repeating tests unnecessarily."

Where do I begin? Well, first of all, Johnson makes some good points in this section about how to reduce health care costs. But, really, does it take all that is on the table right now to accomplish these reductions? I don't think so. The Health Insurance industry could solve this issue tomorrow it was fully true. I've seen enough doctors who didn't share information and tests were repeated unnecessarily. Of course, if the patient stays on top of things, they can help the doctors get the information they need. At the same time, we might be leading to a situation where nobody tests because last month's tests didn't have the answer. Isn't it possible that multiple tests may be the doctor's idea of looking for something that didn't show up the first time but he believes is there? If we cut him off at the pass, isn't it the patient that suffers?

Rationing will happen with a government option. When the system becomes so bloated with bureaucrats and inefficiency that the government is forced to cut costs by denying care to the patient, rationing will have occurred. The problem is that the government is far far from the model of an efficient and incorruptible company. The current reality makes this all a pipe dream. Johnson, along with many of his cohorts, seems to honestly believe that if they say it won't happen, then surely it won't. I wish I could believe that but I've never seen anything to make me think it's even possible with our government.

Finally: "Medicare offers stable, affordable coverage to millions of Americans 65 and over. How will reform affect this program?" His response: "Health reform efforts will strengthen Medicare" by "reining in spiraling health costs that threaten teh long-term stability of the program." He believes all this "preventative care" due to better coverage will result in better care in our old age and less stress on Medicare costs.

Well, if you believe the rest, then that is marginably possible. The real issue comes from his next statement, however. He says, "Recently, outrageous accusations have claimed that health reform will 'kill seniors' and that panels will decide who is healthy enough to merit care. There is no truth to these claims. Unfortunately, scare tactics such as these only mislead the public and prevent a constructive discussion of the issues."

This is the democrat way of getting rid of those who oppose them. They claim we're all using nothing more than scare tactics, as if there is no validity to this. As if there isn't even the remotest possibility that some form of this could happen. The idea of "death panels" is really just an issue of cause and effect. The near-certainty of rationing necessarily leads to someone, somewhere, sometime making the decision of who gets care and who doesn't. This is where the real crazy thoughts happen. Who is the most expendable? Who is the least important?

There is another possibility in all this. We could wind up with a universal system based on how well the government has handled health care on Indian Reservations. We see plenty of this in South Dakota and Tim Johnson should know that. He's been honored enough on the reservations. "Don't get sick after June." Why? Because all the money available for health care has already been spent by then. Don't expect adequate care after June. Check out the following link at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzihyQz0ovE .

I don't want that. I don't want the government meddling in health care. I can handle some regulation but leave the real reform to the American people. We will handle the insurance companies. It is our dollars that keep the around and it a lack of our dollars that push them to change.