Randall Hoven at American Thinker has an article up entitled “A Conservative Case for Universal Health Coverage.”
There’s not much I can add to the article except some things he may not have covered. One, I don’t believe he included the employers’ contributions to the amount paid out of pocket for health coverage which would raise the amount of private spending. Two, the regulations they would slap onto outright universal coverage would still leave a lot of people “out in the cold.” HillaryCare, for instance, would penalize people who don’t live a healthy lifestyle by guidelines that are often shifting and sometimes just outright wrong. If you listen to health news these days, one day something will be good for you according to one study and the next day it will be implicated in causing cancer. On the other hand some guidelines are still in the “dark ages.” I have a friend who is uninsurable because of a congenital defect. She’s 54, almost 55. The defect was treatable and was treated before she was a teenager. Who decides and what are their qualifications for making those decisions?
Folks, we’re all going to die someday, no matter what we do. As my husband has said, “I knew a fellow once who ate right, exercised every day, and spent a lot of time worrying about his health. He keeled over from a heart attack while on his treadmill.”
He’s also right in pointing out that we’re already in the government health care racket and there’s really no way to go back from that point so, perhaps, we should think about what would make it advantageous to the country as a whole.