Obama’s crazy healthcare plan

Jim Simpson
Published: April 10, 2008

This week, while waiting in my doctor’s office, I came across a trade magazine called Modern Healthcare. In this particular issue, July 2/9, 2007, Senator Barack Obama wrote an opinion piece regarding his proposal for a solution to our healthcare “crisis.” The column was titled “My cure for an ailing system.”

In the very first paragraph he indicates that “an increasing number of individuals” cannot afford healthcare. This followed a testament that our system has the “best medical technology” and that “investment in scientific research has paid off handsomely.” Very interesting. With most other fields, an increase in technology actually results in a drop in price while improvements continually provide more effective and efficient solutions. When I purchased my first 286 12MHz personal computer from CompuAdd, around 1986 or so, my father had to give me a loan as it cost around $1800 (including options and accessories). My system has a 80MB hard drive (considered large at the time) and a kick-butt CGA 14 inch monitor. Nowadays you can purchase a Dell Inspiron 530, with a Intel Celeron 1.6GHz processor and 270GB drive (no monitor), starting at $349. Yet in the healthcare industry the opposite seems to hold true.

Senator Obama then states that he will “sign a healthcare plan into law by the end of [his] first term in office” that will “guarantee quality, affordability and portability of health coverage for every American; modernize the U.S. healthcare system to contain spiraling healthcare costs and improve the quality of patient care …” Here we go again. A politician who claims that they are going to “improve” and “modernize” a system that, in virtually the same breath, just seconds earlier, he was praising as “the best medical technology in the world” which offers most Americans (again in his words) “their choice of top doctors and hospitals.” So … how does a liberal go about “fixing” such a system?

Well, the very first point he mentions in his plan is a “public insurance program.” As I pointed out last week, once such a program is created, employers will cease carrying health insurance as a benefit to entice employees. Ah … but Senator Obama has that covered. Just as I mentioned last week, another of his action items is “require all employers to contribute toward health coverage for their employees or toward the cost of the public plan.” Starting to sound familiar?

Can anyone honestly say that they want their healthcare being provided in a similar fashion that the DMV provides licensing and registration services?
Once the government takes over healthcare we are going to see a LOT more pain and suffering.

Senator Obama then states that “For those who already have insurance, the only thing that will change is that their premiums will be lower.” Are you kidding me? He hasn’t addressed any of the root causes for high premiums, yet he wants everyone to believe that mandates and a new tax — taken before you see your paycheck — is going to have the sole result of lowering premiums. Senator Obama then says “My plan will demand greater efficiencies from our healthcare system…” and “… we would reduce the cost of our healthcare by improving quality.” This is not logical. It is in the best interest right now of our private healthcare system to reduce costs through efficiency and improvements. Quality comes at a price. Increasing it does not “decrease” costs.

So, what has Senator Obama completely ignored regarding ever increasing healthcare costs? Senator Obama is also Attorney Obama. Obama, like
Attorney Hillary Clinton and Attorney John Edwards, refuses to look into the mirror. It is our legal system that is the root cause of our healthcare crisis. John Edwards, a trial lawyer, even participated in class-action lawsuits that had the effect of increasing healthcare costs.

We also have a government agency — the FDA — that holds back life-saving medicines from people with terminal illnesses so that any potential long-term negative effects can be studied for years. Meanwhile the people who could benefit from those drugs are dying.

It is my understanding that many of these drugs have been in use overseas for years. There is even pressure by some politicians to stop the “off-label” use of certain drugs that have known beneficial properties in improving conditions the drugs were not meant to treat.

And people want the government making decisions about what kind of care we need? Come on!

James Simpson can be reached at .