This first point, is one in which proponents of “free government health care” and I agree completely. The idea sounds so nice.
It’s when I move beyond this first, juvenile desire of mine and start to analyze how DC intends to achieve “health coverage for 96% of Americans” (sorry, residents of skid row) that I find myself opposing the new Federal strategy. Many who stand behind the congressional Big-Brother-esque health care plan do so because they don’t bother to educate themselves about HOW a humanitarian goal is approached, only that someone SAYS that they are attempting to work towards it. Numerous nationalized health care supporters don’t even realize that it is they, not the Feds, who will be paying for the care, whether they end up wanting it or not.
I myself don’t currently have health coverage, for a couple of reasons. For one, my personal view is that Western Medical science is not all it’s cracked up to be. In addition to this fact, the coverage that is available to me as an individual does not represent an equal value to what I would pay for it. In short, I too am greatly dissatisfied with the reality of health care here in the US, so I don’t participate.
The great change that Obama is gunning for? I would be forced to pay for the same inferior products that I currently decline and another unconstitutional bureaucracy, designed by those it claims to audit, would be born.
Stock prices for shares of most EXISTING health care corporations are rising as congress approaches passage of health care reform, what does that tell you? Those who WANT health care for all would be much better served by looking for solutions on a state level. Not only would state health care plans be constitutional, but they would be forced to innovate while effectively competing for business against other states.