NetHorse

11. *Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could
further explode since universal care may expose the government to
legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep
pockets usually invites more lawsuits.* When you're dealing with
any business, for example a privately-funded hospital, if an
employee negligently causes an injury, the employer is ultimately
liable in a lawsuit. If government funds all health care, that
would mean the U.S. government, an organization with enormous
amounts of cash at its disposal, would be ultimately responsible
for the mistakes of health care workers. Whether or not a doctor
has made a mistake, he or she is always a target for frivolous
lawsuits by money-hungry lawyers & clients that smell deep
pockets. Even if the health care quality is the same as in a
government-funded system, the level of lawsuits is likely to
increase simply because attorneys know the government has the
money to make settlements and massive payouts. Try to imagine
potential punitive damages alone. When the government has the
ability to spend several /trillion/ dollars per year, how much
will a jury be willing to give a wronged individual who is feeble,
disfigured, or dying?

12. *Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or
increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further
loss of personal freedoms.* With government-paid health care, any
risky or healthy lifestyle will raise the dollar cost to society.
Thus, politicians will be in a strong position to pass more "sin"
taxes on things like alcohol, high-fat food, smoking, etc. They
could ban trans fat, limit msg, eliminate high-fructose corn
syrup, and so on. For some health nuts, this may sound like a good
thing. But pretty soon, people will find they no longer have the
option to enjoy their favorite foods, even in moderation, or
alternatively, the cost of the items will be sky high. Also, it
just gives the government yet another method of controlling our
lives, further eroding the very definition of America, Land of the
Free.

13. *Patient confidentiality is likely to be compromised since
centralized health information will likely be maintained by the
government.* While a centralized computer health information
system may reduce some costs of record keeping, protecting the
privacy of patients will likely become very difficult. The
government would have yet another way to access information about
citizens that should be private. Any doctor or other health
professional would be able to access your entire health history.
What if hackers get into the data?

14. *Health care equipment, drugs, and services may end up being
rationed by the government. In other words, politics, lifestyle of
patients, and philosophical differences of those in power, could
determine who gets what.* Any time you have politicians making
health care decisions instead of medical or economics professions,
you open a whole group of potential rationing issues. As costs
inevitably get out of control and have to be curtailed, /some/
ways will be needed to cut costs. Care will have to be rationed.
How do you determine what to do with limited resources? How much
of "experimental" treatments will have to be eliminated? If you're
over 80, will the government pay for the same services as people
under 30? Would you be able to get something as expensive as a
pacemaker or an organ transplant if you're old? Would your
political party affiliation or group membership determine if you
received certain treatments? What if you acquire AIDS through drug
use or homosexual activity, would you still receive medical
services? What if you get liver disease through alcoholism, or
diabetes from being overweight, or lung cancer from smoking--will
the government still help you? You may or may not trust the
current president & Congress to make reasonable decisions, but
what about future presidents and congressional members?

15. *Patients may be subjected to extremely long waits for treatment.*
Stories constantly come out of universal health care programs in
Britain and Canada about patients forced to wait months or years
for treatments that we can currently receive immediately in
America. With limited financial and human resources, the
government will have to make tough choices about who can treatment
first, and who must wait. Patients will like be forced to suffer
longer or possibly die waiting for treatment.

16. *Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken
as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near
impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of
control.* Social security was originally put in place to help
seniors live the last few years of their lives; however, the
retirement age of 65 was set when average life spans were
dramatically shorter. Now that people are regular living into
their 90s or longer, costs are skyrocketing out of control, making
the program unsustainable. Despite the fact that all politicians
know the system is heading for bankruptcy in a couple decades, no
one is rushing to fix it. When President Bush tried to
re-structure it with private accounts, the Democrats ran a scare
campaign about Bush's intention to "take away your social
security". Even though he promised no change in benefits, the fact
that he was proposing change at all was enough to kill the effort,
despite the fact that Democrats offered zero alternative plan to
fix it. Despite Republican control of the presidency and both
houses, Bush was not even close to having the political support to
fix something that has to be fixed ASAP; politicians simply didn't
want to risk their re-elections. The same pattern is true with
virtually all government spending programs. Do you think
politicians will ever be able to cut education spending or
unemployment insurance?...Only if they have a political death
wish. In time, the same would be true of universal health care
spending. As costs skyrocket because of government inefficiency
and an aging population, politicians will never be able to
re-structure the system, remove benefits, or put private practice
options back in the system....that is, unless they want to give up
hope of re-election. With record debt levels already in place, we
can't afford to put in another "untouchable" spending program,
especially one with the capacity to easily pass defense and social
security in cost.

__________________
┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐
ICQ # 427013273