Who’s up For Some Health Insurance?

In a period of American history where “growing turmoil” perfectly describes the atmosphere, immediate answers seem like the best solution. However, most of the answers spewed out from major media stations, whether it is CNN, MSNBC, or—not surprisingly at all—FOX News, are quite frankly incorrect. Unfortunately, most factual errors come in the most serious issue to date: healthcare. President Obama’s plan is good, but not great; when it comes to Universal Healthcare… that’s great. (SHOUTOUT to http://alphainventions.com)

Before any questions are posed, the answer is yes, there is a health crisis. It doesn’t matter if people “like” their plan or not. It’s the inner workings of the failing insurance system that matters. Most media outlets discuss the now infamous figure of 47 millions citizens being uninsured. That is, by no means necessary, not a staggering number. What’s especially staggering is the statistic for citizens underinsured. What’s the most staggering is when both numbers are added. Take around 25 million citizens underinsured, and combine it with 47 million uninsured. That’s around 72 million U.S. citizens who need help. What’s scary is that the “25 million” is from 2007, which means that the number has undoubtedly risen since then. Why “guess” it’s increased? The number of underinsured used to be 16 million in 2005.

How does this all tie in to the fact this is a “crisis”? The current U.S. population is around 304,059,724 as of only July 2008. Put 75 million over that figure and you have nearly a quarter of the entire population with not enough or no insurance. In other words, around one out of every four people is part of this crisis. The reason for anyone being uninsured or underinsured is solely because of the cost of the current health care system. Nevertheless, insurance isn’t the only issue with our system. Both quantity and quality are issues, though many politicians would say otherwise.

Ironically, the CIA World Factbook says how appalling the quality of U.S. healthcare is. Our infant mortality rate is around 6.3 deaths per 1000 live births, while the U.K. has a number of around 4.9 deaths per 1000 live births. Regarding life expectancy, Japan, Canada, France, Sweden, Italy, Germany, the U.K., Puerto Rico, and Denmark have a higher life expectancy than the U.S., with all of those countries having a universal healthcare system. In addition, according to the same World Factbook, Iraq has a better death rate for 2009, with a rate of 5.03 compared to 8.38 from the U.S. In other words, the country at “war” with us is quite literally living better. The reason is because the universal health coverage is provided by United States war funding. In laymen’s terms, we’ve provided universal healthcare… but just not for us.

Probably the most important issue is the cost of healthcare. Even if countries with universal health don’t have incredibly better quality healthcare than us, they still manage to compete at a much lower price. The United States pays around twice as much for healthcare compared to most countries in the world. One would think that since we pay so much, our quality of healthcare would be top of the line… wrong. In order to tackle an issue that’s draining a dying economy, the United States must first accept the fact that healthcare is a right, not a privilege; it is completely immoral to deny someone the ability to ensure a long and prosperous life. Second, the United States should completely overhaul the current system. A public option is good, but to keep the insurance companies that have proven not to work efficiently is to take a risk to large for many Americans.

As a slight side note, Universal healthcare would actually help with the current recession; it has been proven to save money, not waste it, according to the National Coalition of Health Care. Universal healthcare could save at least $320 billion over 10 years based on four different scenarios the NCHC tested, with a single-payer system saving $1.1 trillion over 10 years (it should be noted we have around a $1.75 trillion deficit). It would also reduce tension for employers who can’t afford paying insurance for their employees; this situation is a major factor in unemployment.

A single-payer system is probably the best solution for healthcare reform. It has been supported for Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), the American Medical Student Association (AMSA), the National Physicians Alliance (NPA), and the California Nurses Association (CNA). In a single payer system, there is no hospital billing, but rather a government based budget, or “global budget,” with a separate budget for different expenses. PNHP outlines a perfect scenario where a single-payer system can be incorporated into the U.S. Each time the Congressional Budget Office has studied forms of the single-payer model, it has either stated it could either cost more initially and save within the next 5-7 years, or save without new taxes. Most state studies have shown that the system would save up to the millions per year, and up to the billions within a decade.

Universal healthcare is the best reasonable solution. It’s obviously not perfect, but then again, most systems outside of the United States are undeniably better than ours. Going back to before, Americans need answers so they can pick the correct side; here’s the answer: support any form of national health care or universal healthcare. There is no argument substantial enough to deny those 75 million citizens proper coverage. Reform is a must during these troubling times, lest we want our wallets and our hopes for a better economy to empty out.