2008 Woodie Awards
Jarrett's argument ignores dangers of socialized medicine
Issue date: 9/27/07 Section: Letters
In a column in the Sept. 20 issue of the Index, Phil Jarrett attempted to make the argument for government-imposed universal health care. What he fails to mention, however, are the inherent dangers of socialized medicine.
Such a system already exists in Canada, yet the situation is far from rosy. Efficiency is not the hallmark of government bureaucracy, and waiting times in Canadian government-run hospitals are sickening. In a survey of hospital administrators in the Journal of Health Affairs, one must wait more than three weeks for a biopsy to test for breast cancer in 21 percent of Canadian hospitals. Only one percent of U.S. hospital administrators said their hospitals had waiting periods that long.
For a 65-year-old man requiring a hip replacement, 50 percent of Canadian hospital administrators said the wait time was more than six months. Not one American hospital had such a long wait. In fact, a case was filed, Chaoulli v. Quebec, that argued waiting times in Canada since the imposition of socialized medicine were life-threatening and violated human rights.
In an era when the Pentagon can get away with paying $600 for a toilet seat, is it reasonable to believe government bureaucracy is the answer? More regulations only will increase costs, increasing taxes exponentially in exchange for a poorer quality of service. The status quo is not acceptable, but the answer is in the free market, not big government.
A plan offered by presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani promises to decrease regulations and offer tax credits up to $15,000 to let all Americans purchase their own insurance instead of being beholden to employers. With millions of Americans now involved in the market, insurance companies will lower prices to stay competitive, at the risk of going out of business if they do not. The only way to lower health care costs is to increase competition, not eliminate it. The idea of government-run hospitals is downright scary.
Tyler Gritts
Senior
Such a system already exists in Canada, yet the situation is far from rosy. Efficiency is not the hallmark of government bureaucracy, and waiting times in Canadian government-run hospitals are sickening. In a survey of hospital administrators in the Journal of Health Affairs, one must wait more than three weeks for a biopsy to test for breast cancer in 21 percent of Canadian hospitals. Only one percent of U.S. hospital administrators said their hospitals had waiting periods that long.
For a 65-year-old man requiring a hip replacement, 50 percent of Canadian hospital administrators said the wait time was more than six months. Not one American hospital had such a long wait. In fact, a case was filed, Chaoulli v. Quebec, that argued waiting times in Canada since the imposition of socialized medicine were life-threatening and violated human rights.
In an era when the Pentagon can get away with paying $600 for a toilet seat, is it reasonable to believe government bureaucracy is the answer? More regulations only will increase costs, increasing taxes exponentially in exchange for a poorer quality of service. The status quo is not acceptable, but the answer is in the free market, not big government.
A plan offered by presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani promises to decrease regulations and offer tax credits up to $15,000 to let all Americans purchase their own insurance instead of being beholden to employers. With millions of Americans now involved in the market, insurance companies will lower prices to stay competitive, at the risk of going out of business if they do not. The only way to lower health care costs is to increase competition, not eliminate it. The idea of government-run hospitals is downright scary.
Tyler Gritts
Senior
Be the first to comment on this story