Posted by
The Patriot on Tuesday, April 15, 2008 9:16:28 AM
It's an age-old principle: he who holds the purse strings is in control of the action. Perhaps your wise old grandpa shared that nugget with you, or maybe some other seasoned citizen. America's seniors would do well to recall that principle when casting a ballot this year. With both Democratic candidates promoting some form of "universal" coverage, and a Democrat controlled Congress, there is at least a decent chance that some form of federally funded "universal" medical insurance is in our future. (note: I put "universal" in quotes because this is simply code for a government-run health care system)
But be careful what you ask for. No sane person will argue that government issued medical insurance means that every person will be permitted to have any and every medical procedure at taxpayer expense. It is a fact that if the government is picking up your medical tab (and everyone else's), there will be rationing of medical services. There are not enough dollars in the Treasury to guarantee every citizen any and all medical services they desire, at any time they desire it...and there never will be. It is a utopian fantasy to think that the government can provide everything to everyone. It will become a necessity to have a decision maker somewhere in some government office, whose purpose in life it will be to review paperwork (probably mounds of it) and stamp it "approved" or "denied." As more and more Americans submit requests to their benevolent government for medical services, more and more of them will be stamped "denied" as the realities of budgeting and accounting impose themselves on the dream world that is "free medical insurance."
This begs the question: "On what basis will the decision be made?" How indeed will the government select those worthy of receiving medical care, and those who are not? Here's a scenario for you. The government employee sits at his desk with two sets of paperwork in front of him. Both are requests from individuals for a liver transplant, necessary to save their lives. There is only enough money in the budget for one. The medical profiles are identical, save one difference. One is a 45-year old male who still has at least another 20 years in the work force as a taxpayer. The other is a 65-year old male who is retired and receiving Social Security benefits. Who gets the procedure? One is a 22-year old female college student with a lifetime of taxpaying ahead of her. The other is a 22-year old female who is severely handicapped and will need to be cared for the rest of her life, and will never pay a dime in taxes. Who gets the procedure?
If you find these questions rather dark and uncomfortable, then you should also find the prospects of a government funded and administered health care system equally dark and uncomfortable. Be careful what you ask for...