Health Care Too Important for 'One Size Fits All' System

While health care services are vitally important to all Americans, how to provide “the best” individualized care is the subject of much debate. Despite what others may claim is the ideal solution, I do not support any form of “universal health care.”

I don’t believe it’s possible to come up with a ‘one size fits all’ system that will provide quality and affordable health care—a concept which virtually everyone demands in our modern society.

While everyone wants “affordable” health care, the major problem policymakers face is how to control costs. Americans spend about 15% of their total income on their health care. So what can Congress do to make the health care system more efficient, more available, and less expensive?

Democrats like to say the whole system should be scrapped and replaced by something more “universal,” pointing to the approximately 43 million Americans who do not currently have health insurance. But we must look behind those numbers to determine why these Americans do not have health coverage—reasons which go beyond availability and costs.

Many healthy Americans simply have chosen not to buy health insurance. Some choose to use the money that would be paid as monthly premiums to pay for other expenses, and they pay for health care services “out of pocket,” as needed. Others cannot easily afford health insurance, so they fall back on Medicaid services or rely on other types of charity.

The majority of Americans who do have health care insurance obtain their coverage through their places of employment. Additionally, a large section of the population—those over age 65, who account for over 50% of all health care costs—are served by our Medicare system and do not need health care insurance in the way the rest of us do.

Some Democrats say that a universal health care system is the best and most fair way to provide coverage for everyone, but we must look carefully at the true costs of such a system.

For one thing, while the majority of Americans who now pay insurance premiums would not have that monthly expense, they would still be “paying” for medical coverage through a substantial increase in their taxes.

In addition, as evidenced by the results of socialized medicine in England, France, Canada and other countries, tax-funded health care systems consistently fail to deliver the level of care that most Americans receive, and expect, now.

In these socialized systems, bureaucrats—not trained health care professionals—would tell us which doctors and hospitals we may use, which services we “qualify” for, how long we may be treated, etc. Our personal choices would be limited, if not totally eliminated.

All Americans should be able to choose their own health care providers and get affordable health care insurance coverage that is both accessible and transferable. Medical insurance coverage options also must be flexible enough to meet the needs of each individual.

The challenge, then, is to find ways to improve our health care insurance system and lower the cost—without sacrificing freedom of choice or quality of care. Placing our medical care in the hands of “distant” bureaucrats who do not understand our individual needs is a mistake we can’t afford to make.

As most of us know, the federal government’s history of trying to “fix” problems usually results in more taxes, more bureaucracy, and less efficiency, which could be far worse than the system we currently have.

I will support any measures that will lower the costs or improve the delivery of quality health care to as many in our population as possible. I also will strive to ensure that increasing health care costs and insurance regulations do not restrict small businesses from offering coverage to their employees.