The Health Care Crisis

"Preserving health by too severe a rule is a worrisome malady" ~ Francois de La Rochefoucauld

Today, I am again typing this entry on the computer at the local county Library. The problem I had with my cable connection yesterday was fixed at approximately 2:50 PM yesterday and I was able to go online the remainder of the day (after I got home from work, that is). This morning, when I got out of bed, it was again down, but this time it had to be fixed by a technician actually coming out here and fixing the problem in the overhead lines. As I type, it is still not operational. I had most of this post already typed and saved to documents, but, alas, I cannot access my documents from the Library computer, so I basically had to completly re-write this.

I recently received an e-mail from Shaun Mullen, the administrator of the moderately progressive Liberal blog, kikos house, inviting me to be a guest blogger on the topic of the healthcare crisis in America. The following is part of the e-mail he sent me:

Year in and year out, reforming America's troubled health-care system is the biggest third rail issue in politics. No matter how you approach it and no matter how you want to fix it, you're going to get shocked.

I previously asked visitors to Kiko's House to guest blog on reforming the U.S. immigration system and for their comments on the third anniversary of the war in Iraq. I am now extending an invitation for you to share your views on how to fix health care.

A little background:

America spends far more for health care per capita than any other first world country.

Nearly 45 million Americans have no health-care insurance. A surprisingly large minority of this group are technically not poor.

Emergency rooms are groaning under huge loads because many patients don't have family physicians, let alone insurance.

Previous efforts at cobbling together a national health-care system have been disasters, although Massachusetts will begin experimenting with a new near-universal system beginning next year.

Pharmaceutical and insurance companies have a disproportionately powerful voice in any discussion about fixing health care.

What do you think needs to happen to fix this mess?

The following is how I responded to his query. It will be posted on his blog, I assume, somewhere around May 6:

In response to your question on how I would fix the Health care system in America:

I believe we are looking at the whole problem backwards. We are constantly trying to focus on how to pay the high costs of health care, and not on how to lower the cost of health care, which I consider more practical.

I am unashamedly Conservative, which already puts me at odds with Kiko and the majority of the readers of his blog. Be that as it may, my solution to the health care crisis in America is one which I formulated many years ago, when I considered myself a Liberal.

So it may be a Liberal solution. I don't know. Nevertheless, I still think it's a very good solution.

We regulate many types of businesses in this country. We put a ceiling on what private enterprise can charge for goods and services. The oil industry is a good example. Gas gouging is illegal. Independent oil companies are not allowed to charge more than a set amount for gasoline.

Similarly, other industries are equally regulated. Grocery stores have a ceiling on prices. As do most industries dealing with essential human needs. Telephone, gas, electric, and trash companies have to obtain permission from the government to raise prices, and then they are limited to how much of a raise they can institute.

Why not healthcare? Doctors and pharmaceutical companies currently have no restrictions on how much they can charge for their goods and services. Why not? Are they somehow better than the oil companies, and the utilities?

Here is my solution: Do not allow doctors and pharmacists to be paid more than a set figure per year. When I first entertained this idea, my original dollar figure was $50,000.00 per year, but with inflation, that is much too low in my opinion. However, I do think $100,000.00 a year is quite enough for doctors and pharmacists to live on.

Besides, a doctor who is a good manager of his money can turn a little money into riches through other means. This plan would not prevent doctors from getting rich. It merely forces them to find more inventive ways to reach a fiduciary goal. Doctors who manage their money well can still become millionaires with this plan.
This will have several related benefits.

First, and most importantly, healthcare costs will plummet, making health care much more affordable for the average American.

Second, this plan would eliminate the mercenary doctor, who only became a doctor to get rich, and couldn't care less about the welfare of his patients, as long as he gets his fee.

The only doctors and pharmacists left would be the ones that genuinely care about the patients health and will do whatever it takes, and explore every avenue to that end.

Additionally, the research scientists would have no more reason to milk the coffers of charitable organizations such as the American Cancer institute, etc., and would likely miraculously find a cure. A cure, that I am quite sure they already know about, but it is relatively inexpensive and if it was permitted to be used would seriously affect he yearly incomes of the doctors.

In short. Don't regulate the patients. Regulate the healthcare profession itself.