July 1, 2009
Health Care Reform
Posted in Healthcare tagged Government, President, Public Option, Socialized Medicine, Universal Health Care at 3:34 pm by Arlanjio
While most Americans, both insured and uninsured, are satisfied with the level of health care they receive [1], President Obama and his allies in Congress are busy selling their reform bill centered around a government options. For the sake or argument, let us set aside the myth that the 45 million uninsured Americans cannot afford health care [2], and the lie that it is the free market lacking government control that is responsible for today’s high prices (hint: the government is already paying about half of all health care bills [3]). Assuming President Obama suceeds in offering a “public option” covering some of the 45 million uninsured Americans, what will happen to our health care system?
At any given moment, there are certain number of physicians available, each can offer certain hours each day to treat patients (hereafter “doctor hours”). On the other hand, there are certain number of patients wanting to spend time with their doctors (“patient time”). If the available doctor hours exceed total patient time, then doctor’s offices will be empty and some doctors will be willing to lower their prices to attract more patients. On the contrary, if patient time exceeds doctor hours, as has been the case with an aging population, then doctors can deal with it by:
- Working longer hours,
- Asking patients to wait longer, or
- Increasing prices so that some patients who are not willing to pay as much will seek help elsewhere.
Since doctors already work long hours and there are limits to human ability, Option 1 is not viable beyond certain point. Options 2 and 3 are what results and are easy to see. Health care costs has already increased significantly in the past decade and wait time has been longer. I used to be able to see my primary doctor within the week I requested an appointment, but now it is more likely two to three weeks.
Now, what will the “public option” do if it becomes available? It will insure more people and encourage them to seek physician help, but will do little to increase available doctor hours. Doctors, natually, will dig further into Options 2 and 3.
Worse yet, the government can control prices and mandate doctors to accept them. Unfortunately, the government cannot review each doctor’s finance and determine prices accordingly. It will inevitably establish some kind of one-size-fits-all pricing scheme. Some doctors will lose money because of higher operating costs due to various reasons. In response they will:
- Close their businesses and either go elsewhere or retire,
- Pass the cost to patients who have private insurances,
- Cut cost in other ways, like reduce maintenance and refrain from upgrading old equipment.
Surely, people with private insurances can afford to pay more, right? Perhaps to certain extend, but why should they? People without an employer coverage will opt for the lowest cost plan with the best coverage. This will most likely be the public option, the only one that does not need to concern about losses. Likewise, businesses will be eager to offload their employees to the public plan to save cost. The government can certainly impose a penalty for businesses who choose not to cover their employees. The penalty will need to be fairly high to be effective. It will give entrepeneurs less incentive to start up new businesses, and existing businesses more incentive to oursource outsource.
In a few years, more and more people will elect the public option, and the result? Private insurance will not be competitive since many insurers will go out of business. Hospitals will go out of businesses and doctors will go elsewhere because they cannot make enough money from the public plan. The remaining hospitals and clinics will be poorly maintained and will not have much incentive in buying new equipment. The government will need to pay more and more and will eventually resort to higher taxes or printing money.
Think this is fear mongering? It is exactly what happened in Tennessee, when the Clinton administration pushed the then Gov. Ned McWherter to establish TennCare . It only took a few years for the State to run out of money and the legislators to mull a never-before income tax [4].
Universal health care is marred by high cost, long lines and a lack of innovation everywhere it has been tried. In Massachusetts, for example, health care cost is significantly higher than initially estimated [5]. In Canada, the United Kingdom and Sweden, long lines [6] and poorer equipment [7] are the norm. Sure, health care in those countries are free, but only if you ignore the cost of unnecessary human suffering or even death while waiting for treatment.
References
[1] John R. Lott, Jr. As Obama Pushes National Health Care, Most Americans Already Happy With Coverage. FOXNews.com. <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/obama-pushes-national-health-care-americans-happy-coverage/>
[2] Ben Shapiro. Myths, Lies and Stupidity About Health Care. Townhall.com. <http://townhall.com/columnists/BenShapiro/2009/06/24/myths,_lies_and_stupidity_about_health_care>
[3] Larry Elder. ’45 Million Americans’ — Who Are Those Guys?. Townhall.com. <http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2009/06/18/45_million_americans_–_who_are_those_guys>
[4] Patrick Poole. Governor Schwarzenegger Should Go to Nashville. American Thinker. <http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/governor_schwarzenegger_should.html>
[5] Phyllis Schlafly. Massachusetts Health Care: A Model Not to Copy. Townhall.com. <http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2009/06/30/massachusetts_health_care_a_model_not_to_copy>
[6] Walter E. Williams. Sweden’s Government Health Care. Townhall.com. <http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2009/03/04/swedens_government_health_care>
[7] Thomas Sowell. Alice in Medical Care. Townhall.com. <http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/06/30/alice_in_medical_care>
