TJP

The GOP Electoral Interest: Defeat HealthCare Reform

By Byron A. Ellis – August 19, 2009

The Democrats won the elections, but the Republicans, supported by blue dogs Democrats, appear to be setting the agenda on healthcare. Healthcare reform without a public government supported option and end of life counseling is more of the same. The government-supported option, as well as the existing private options, must be included in any healthcare reform.

Countries around the world with a government supported healthcare system have higher life expectancy than the United States. Moreover, many have mixed health care systems, private and public, competing side by side.

One of the relevant question in the healthcare debate is why do Republicans fear healthcare reform? When they know that reform of the healthcare system will provide many of their fellow citizens with early access to medical care, which will make them better off. True followers of Christ embrace improving the condition of their neighbors.

Some Republican leaders, such as Palin and Grassley, have spewed lies about government supported healthcare systems, even labeling end of life counseling “death panels.” However, end of life counseling will provide patients and relatives essential decision-making knowledge, and hence choices.

A well-implemented government supported healthcare system that includes neighborhood and regional based clinics would significantly reduce hospital emergency visits, one of the most costly elements of the existing system. A recent two-night emergency hospital admission to a three-bed room of a Brooklyn NY patient with stomach pain and blood in stool cost over $17,000; we can assume that the cost of the other two patients in the room was also about $8,500 per patient per night.

Clearly, if neighborhood clinics were readily available and accessible, the hospital cost would have been avoided and the care received would, more likely than not, be comparable to hospital care. Moreover, the patient would not have spent two nights away from home and work. Thus, personal and productivity cost would have also been mitigated.

Republicans have also indicated that a public option would lead to rationing. This is a Malthusian assumption. Malthus was an British economist who believed that population growth would lead to food rationing; he failed to understand human capacity. Thus, like Malthus, the Republican arguments of rationing preclude human capacity to fulfill needs.

Ironically, these are the same Republicans that constantly argue in favor of market based economies, which postulate that in a profit based system excess demand (for healthcare services) would over time be satisfied by entrepreneurs supplying the goods and services (of clinics, doctors, nurses, and other medical technicians) demanded.

The real Republican fear is the successful implementation of a U.S. healthcare system. Therefore, they are willing to sacrifice healthcare reform and their fellow citizens for their own selfish gains. We’ve heard Limbaugh, Beck and others like them wishing the failure of the Obama stimulus and the Federal Reserve monetary expansion. For them, achieving a Republican electoral victory in 2010 is more important than stabilizing the economy and creating employment for their fellow citizens.

Listen and follow them at your peril.

Post Comment

SAVE DARFUR