The Liberty Letter – Of The People, For The People

Good health, and the subsequent positive functions in Life derived from attaining and maintaining good health, is something that we all can benefit from. If you are in good health, you are considered lucky but I will submit that you didn’t get there by not paying attention to it. Whether it’s eating right, getting some exercise, smiling more or washing your hands regularly, people that have good health, generally, make it part of their Life Process. While this is not to say that humans get diseases even if they take precautions, it is a statement about taking personal responsibility for one’s well-being. Pointing the finger elsewhere only delays the positive effects of acting in a positive way.

Healthcare is a very personal scenario. Every human being is different, much like the proverbial snowflake field, and his or her treatment of a disease or affliction, while possibly falling under some general diagnosis and treatment, is unique in how they react to that treatment in how they recover. What is known is that all human beings cannot be painted with the same broad brush when it comes to healthcare.

The mainstream medical community attempts to do this in many ways and, via that “expert” analysis, politicians attempt to legislate good health into the population. The present, unconstitutional mandate of the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare) is this type of legislation. While medical bankruptcies are an issue, they do not present themselves as part of preventive or general care. They present themselves via major (catastrophic) medical events in a person’s history; a debilitating disease, a major injury or an inability to function in society because of a mental disorder. Healthcare costs are as high as they ever have been and, with the new legislation, medical corporations are adding charges that would be considered “administrative” to the list of “medical” needs so that those costs get rolled up into a final bill that has more “approved” charges. So, really, this does nothing to make HC more affordable.

The Affordable Healthcare Act is also supposed to make HC more accessible. Physically, there are plenty of accessible HC options already. Everything from clinics to private practices to full-blown specialty hospitals exist in every corner of our Country. Trauma, eye surgery, cancer treatment, breast enhancement, spinal surgery, allergy treatment; you name it, we can do it here in the US. Some say we have the best HC in the world but we can’t “access” it BECAUSE IT’S TOO EXPENSIVE. So, if the Affordable HC Act doesn’t make HC more affordable, it doesn’t make it more accessible either, does it?

Then, there’s the politics of it all. Many of this Administration’s political supporters received waivers pertaining to the mandate of businesses providing HC for all their employees. Many other businesses cut their staff hours, even down to part-time, so that they don’t have to provide HC insurance. When the HC bill was presented to Congress, there was NO discussion that this was a TAX. But, Supreme Court Justice Roberts, usually a conservative, decided that, to make the mandate constitutional, he deemed it a tax. Not only does this defy logic but it also changes the genre of the legislation from a HC bill to a tax bill, making the implementation more expensive because it changes our already unwieldy Tax Code, which opens a whole new can of worms.

The present HC law is not only unconstitutional but it is Socialist in nature, making its premise against everything that our Republic stands for. Our Republic was built on individual Liberties and Freedoms and Socialism diminishes the individual in sacrifice to the collective State agenda. As I stated earlier, HC is an individual situation and painting with the broad brush of Socialism doesn’t solve the issue at hand: It’s just too expensive.

What is more important is a system that is affordable, making it accessible, while instilling the self-sufficient, accountable and responsible attitude of good health. Catastrophic care plans do this and they do it well. In the event of a debilitating disease, crippling injury or Life-threatening surgery, the plan pays off. The bumps, bruises, sneezes and sniffles are covered by pre-tax FSA/HCA accounts and are paid at the time of service. Not only does this reduce the cost of these minor services by way of removing the never-ending insurance billing cycle, it allows the doctor to reduce fees and operate on the free market like any other service. One other, often overlooked, advantage of catastrophic care is that it is almost impervious to fraud. You either have cancer or you don’t. You can’t fake a broken leg. Therefore, the issues that cause medical bankruptcies are covered and this, for the most part, alleviates these financial catastrophes completely.  Lastly, with the cost at a reasonable rate (I’ve estimated in the $85/mo/person range), it is something that more people will be likely to participate in WILLINGLY, without a mandate or being forced to pay for exorbitant insurance that doesn’t seem to cover any service that is provided.

Granted, the HC system in the US needs work but “finding out what’s in it by passing it” (Thank You, Fraulein Pelosi, for that stunning display of cognitive excellence!) is NOT the way to do it.