Monday, September 17, 2007

Hillary's plan for universal health care

I haven't studied Hillary Clinton's just-announced plan for universal health care - I've just heard the short reports about it on cable news. I hear her requirement that EVERYONE have health insurance being equated to people being required to have car insurance. One problem with that analogy - the requirement for me (or any car owner) to have car insurance isn't designed to so much protect ME in the event I am in a car accident as to protect others, particularly if I am at fault. State minimum requirements (at least in Texas) only require I carry liability insurance - not coverage that protects me for injury to myself or damage to my vehicle. Currently, I am uninsured. I'm under employed, since I don't have a full-time teaching job after graduating with my M.Ed and earning my teaching certificate, and the group student health insurance I had (which I had paid for myself) recently lapsed, as I am no longer eligible to renew it. A couple of weeks ago, I had a sore throat that wasn't getting better. I didn't go to the emergency room to get it taken care of, so I am no drain on the American taxpayer - I went to a local walk-in clinic, paid for my clinic visit when I left, and told the doctor I preferred the generic version of the antibiotic. I took my prescription to the pharmacy at my neighborhood grocery store and had it filled, and paid for it myself. At this point, paying for that kind of thing out-of-pocket is cheaper than paying a monthly individual health insurance premium...

I don't want universal healthcare mandated by the government. When I went to the walk-in clinic, I was in and out in less than an hour. If we had a system like Canada or Britain, how long would I have had to wait to see a doctor? In that situation, I might not have been out the doctor's fee and the cost of the prescription, but I don't think I would have received the same level of care.

I also know that not every "uninsured" person is uninsured because they cannot afford it. Some make the decision, after weighing the pros and cons, to not carry health insurance. A few years ago, I got back in touch with an old friend from junior high school who happens to live in town. He explained to me that he and his wife (both self-employed) don't have health insurance. They take the money they would ordinarily pay for health insurance premiums and put that into a medical savings account. Not an unreasonable decision when you and your family are healthy, and your premium goes "wasted" because you have not had to go to the doctor.

So, for the 15% that are uninsured, and the smaller percentage that truly "can't afford" health insurance, if you need to go to the hospital, you aren't going to be turned away. But why screw the 85% who are insured to "fix" that problem, and in the process create a new, huge government bureacracy that will not be run as efficiently or as effectively as it would be if it were a private enterprise? And I also can't help but think how many of those "uninsured Americans" aren't actually American, and of those non-American "Americans", how many shouldn't even be in this country...


Educator-To-Be said...

Miss Ladybug:

Thanks for posting on my blog.

You have a wonderful, wonderful blog.

I will answer your question now.


mrsrodriguez said...

Hillary's healthcare progam is called America's Health Choices Plan
but you have no choice. Because if you make more than a certain amount you can keep your private insurance but you pay for it, and everyone else's plus about 60,000 dollars in tax.