The Case for Universal Healthcare in the US - Essay Example

The Case for Universal Healthcare in the U.S. That the inadequate healthcare system needs a significantan immediate overhaul is undeniable. Health care professionals understand the problems associated with the failing system more so than anyone and are the first to voice their concerns. Americans of all political ideologies agree too many individuals and families are uninsured or underinsured and that health care costs are higher than necessary but Republican and Democratic lawmakers disagree on the solution. Unlike other industrialized countries, economic status plays a major role in determining health status for Americans, a despicable circumstance in the minds of Europeans who enjoy cradle-to-grave medical care. They consider it a birthright. Taking care of the nations sick without regard to their social position is a responsibility civilized society’s embrace, at least those outside the U.S. The most favorable outcome would be the ‘single payer’ system, otherwise referred to as universal health care, a more efficient system that covers everyone, essentially emulating a similar approach employed by Britain, Canada, Cuba, Brazil, Russia, Japan, western European countries and many other nations. Implementing universal health care will significantly reduce the burden of escalating healthcare costs to working families and eliminate the quality of care divide in this country that exists between wealthy and the other 95 percent of the population. Most Americans identify the health care crisis is one of the main concerns facing the nation as evidenced by the amount of rhetoric allocated to this issue in the current presidential debates. The majority of Americans concurs with the majority of the world’s population in that a society has the responsibility to care for its sick and injured without regardless of their financial status. “Nearly seven in ten respondents go so far as indicating they would be willing to pay more in federal taxes to assure that every American citizen has health care coverage” (“Who should pay” 2004). That more than 40 million Americans do not have health insurance is widely acknowledged but those who are insured often cannot afford the medical care they require. A universal health care system similar to what is offered the bulk of the ‘civilized’ world should not be a matter of debate, it should be a reality. It’s what the public desires and moreover, what they deserve as U.S. citizens. Many times we hear the phrase, ‘America is number one!’ but of course this applies to economic and military prowess only and certainly does not include other areas, the quality and affordability of health care in particular. “The United States, which has the most expensive health system in the world, underperforms consistently relative to other countries and differs most notably in the fact that Americans have no universal health insurance coverage” (Presse, 2007). The U.S. is unquestionably not number one with regards to health care delivery. The infant mortality rate in America ranks 23rd worldwide, 20th in life expectancy and trails Botswana, coming in at 67th with regard to child immunizations and this is just a partial list. Overall, the U.S. and the very poor third-world country of Cuba are neck-and-neck in providing health care to its citizens. “The United States ranks poorly relative to other industrialized nations in health care despite having the best trained health care providers and the best medical infrastructure of any industrialized nation” (Battista, McCabe, 1999). Those opposed to universal health care such as insurance and pharmaceutical companies have characterized this system as ‘socialized medicine.’ This moniker elicits fears of communist ideals, the ‘red menace’ creeping into American society. Universal health care, however, cannot be accurately describes as socialized medicine. (Battista, McCabe, 1999). If the single-payer system can be categorized as socialism then other worthwhile endeavors such as the military can be as well. Few, if any, are opposed to socialized police, fire and ambulance services or would want to privatize the public school system. Americans of all political leanings are willing to finance these important services yet some, those influenced by the fear-mongering of insurance and pharmaceutical lobbying efforts, would deny health care delivered by the same method. Meeting the health needs of people is as or more important than the other services currently supplied in a socialistic means. “In the United States, certain publicly funded health care programs help to provide for the elderly, disabled, military service families and veterans, and the poor and federal law ensures public access to emergency services regardless of ability to pay; however, a system of universal health care has not been implemented” (“Universal” 2005). In a universal, or single-payer, health care system, the government accumulates tax monies from individuals and businesses to finance health care facilities that are freely open to everyone. Implementing such a system would mean an end to Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO’s) and insurance companies that provide health insurance, a fact few are heartbroken about. Universal health care is not simply a humanitarian concern which alone would be reason enough to rally support for it but continuing with the present system will push many more families to the brink of financial ruin as well. Medical bills were of little concern to families in the 1950’s but the medical technology seems archaic by today’s standards. Half a century ago, a person’s lifespan was approximately 68 where today, it is a decade longer. Those in their 40’s today can reasonably expect to see their 80th birthday. Most, presumably, would prefer to spend more money to live longer which is what has happened. From this perspective, healthcare could be considered a good return on an investment. The benefits and costs of healthcare are not unrelated yet many do not understand why they have to pay more than they did equivalent to the 1950’s or even to 1999. People generally consider healthcare costs to be a commodity in the same way they think of electricity or gasoline where price has little bearing on the quality of the product. The vastly contrasting societies of the U.S., Cuba and Japan were compared by the study to illustrate this finding. The gross domestic product (GDP) was balanced against the average life span in each country which proved higher incomes did not necessarily equate to healthier citizens. The GDP (per person) in the U.S. is $34,000 while the life-span averages about 77 years. Cuba’s GDP is $5200 but the life expectancy is the same. The Japanese GDP is $25,000 and the life expectancy, the highest in the world, is better than 81 years (Bhattacharya, 2004). Universal heal care will eliminate the financial burden to the elderly, poor and middle class families. Opponents to the plan make the argument that people are not entitled to health care. This view is in the vast minority compared to the rest of the world and the U.S. as well yet reflects the reality in the country. (Battista, McCabe, 1999). Opponents also claim universal health care would be prohibitively costly. The facts do not bear-out this fear, however. The U.S. spends more money, per capita, than all other nations that provide universal coverage, a startling 40 percent more than any of these countries. According to studies by both the Federal Budget and General Accounting Office, the U.S. would save between $100 and $200 billion every year if universal health care was implemented. The State of Massachusetts has recently enacted a single-payer health care system and expects to save between $1 and 2$ billion in the first year. Connecticut is soon to follow. These savings have been confirmed in studies conducted by that state. Canada went to the single-payer system in 1971. The vast majority of its citizens would not choose to revert back to the old, U.S.-style system nor would the government which has saved significant amounts of money though the economy is weak as compared to the U.S. Much of the savings is in bureaucratic expenses. (Battista, McCabe, 1999). Currently, the U.S. is the only industrialized, ‘civilized’ country that allows its citizens to be refused health care due to their inability to pay. This embarrassing circumstance would be eliminated by implementing universal health care and the government would save hundreds of billions every year. Other than insurance and pharmaceutical companies, all would benefit. Americans are needlessly suffering and dying while vast amounts of money is being wasted, all for no reason other than the stubbornness of the leaders of the country to address the problem. It’s not because universal health care does not make sense economically or politically. The insurance and pharmaceutical industries are large contributors to politicians and have the funds to bombard the media with self-serving propaganda designed scare people into continuing the current failed system. Americans should be appalled and ashamed at the system and themselves for being so blindly manipulated. Works Cited Battista, John R., M.D. McCabe, Justine, Ph.D. “Talk Given To The Association of State Green Parties” (June 4, 1999). November 22, 2008 Bhattacharya, Shaoni “Higher status leads to a longer life.” New Scientist. (June 8, 2004). November 22, 2008 Presse, Agence France. “U.S. Health System Ranks Last Compared to Other Countries” (May 15, 2007). November 22, 2008 Read More