Mr. Aman recently had a letter published in the Reporter, wherein he questioned some points I made in a previous letter regarding the health-care bill. (“Health-care letter questioned,” by Richard Wesley Aman, Feb. 10 Kent Reporter.)
I would like to cite some effects of nationalized health-care in the U.K. as an example of why nationalized health-care would be disastrous for Americans.
In the U.K., patients must often wait for several hours in ambulances outside hospitals, before entering the hospitals for an additional four-hour wait prior to receiving care. Hospitals often admit patients unnecessarily because the government pays hospitals nearly $1,000 for each patient admitted. There is a six-month wait for surgeries, and almost 20 percent of colon cancer patients who are treatable at diagnosis are incurable by the time treatment is available.
Dental care is terrible in the U.K. Almost 50 percent of dentists won’t accept patients on government health care, and 20 percent of citizens choose against receiving dental care because of the high costs. Six percent have resorted to self-treatment, such as using superglue to reattach crowns.
After the government created new contracts to improve dental care and availability, 58 percent of the citizens say the changes worsened dental care. Eighty-four percent find it no easier to find a dentist than it was previously.
Citizens have suffered tragically in every nation that has nationalized healthcare. The U.K. is only one unfortunate example. An interesting question: If universal health care is efficient and high-quality, then why do foreigners, including political leaders of other developed nations, come to America for medical treatment?
The Congressional Budget Office reported in October 2009 that tort reform would save as much as $54 billion. If tort reform were joined with several small-scale reforms, such as allowing doctors and patients to work out costs, state and federal deregulation of the insurance industry, etc., our health-care system would become greatly improved.
In Mr. Aman’s letter, he rightly stated that “most insurance company regulation is done by the states.” However, the federal government does regulate the insurance industry through the Sherman, Clayton, and Federal Trade Commission Acts. These acts authorize the fed to regulate “peripherals” of the insurance industry – labor, tax law, securities, etc. State governments regulate the “business” of insurance. Both federal and state governments must deregulate the insurance industry for reform to be effectual.
Insurance companies do not necessarily act on behalf of their paying customers. It seems that health care is best handled directly between doctors and patients, without third-party involvement. Universal health care will create more problems for Americans, decreasing the quality of health care available and raising costs limitlessly.
Angelique Maxson
Auburn
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website https://www.kentreporter.com/submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
