House call

Why would anyone with a scintilla of intelligence promote big government? If one were to observe supertankers at sea, you would note that those huge ships are extremely difficult to maneuver. They can neither stop quickly nor turn on a dime. Government and large private bureaucracies are similar. When confronted with a catastrophe or faced with rapidly deteriorating conditions, bloated bureaucracies are generally ineffective. In and of itself a slow responding agency might be tolerable except for the fact that the government is often the party of last resort. In other words, if government cannot resolve the issue in a timely and effective manner, then no one else is in a position to remedy the situation.




One of the current battlegrounds surrounding the growth of government here in the United States is the debate about “healthcare reform.” This is the type of issue that is ripe for demagoguery as the various interested parties overwhelm us with multiple instances of anecdotal evidence either supporting or denigrating the proposals under consideration. Actually, the legislation that has been submitted thus far does not reform healthcare per se, rather the focus is on health insurance. I have not attempted to ascertain just how many health insurers there are in the United States, but I submit that if they were free to compete in all 50 states, then it seems likely that competition would radically enhance affordability. If there is only one source of insurance with no competitive restraints, then I would assume that costs will not be contained in a rational manner.



The debate has often centered on the quality of care as well as the cost. Well, I have an anecdotal gem for you. Nearly 32 years ago (February, 1978) I was diagnosed with Type I diabetes. With excellent doctors, phenomenal developments in medicines and technology, and some personal lifestyle changes, I am enjoying a robust life to the fullest. Next June I will celebrate my 64th birthday. When I was a mere whippersnapper, diabetes or “sugar” was deadly. One’s life was expected to be short and gruesome. I knew friends and relatives who suffered from the ravages of the disease, and I attended their funerals. After more than three decades with the disease, I do have some occasional discomfort, but if you didn’t know that I am a diabetic, you would not be able to discern it in a casual social setting. The issue is not health care.



There are remedies available for tweaking the system in ways that provide access to quality care for all citizens, and there are other mechanisms available for controlling costs without radically restructuring the health care delivery system. You do not tear down the house to repair a broken window…or several broken windows. You get new transparent glass and place it in the original framework. Then you glaze it to make certain that it does not get out of line. Personally, I would rather we dump the whole structure and morph into an individually-based cash system. I realize, though, that if I lead that movement, when I look behind me, I would be alone.



So, let’s tweak the current health care system to make it more accessible and more affordable for our neighbors, but let’s not let the government become the 800 pound gorilla in health care. I do not want Big Brother controlling every facet of my life. For example, if I own a shotgun for sporting purposes, I do not want the government telling me that firearms have been declared a health risk. “Give up the gun if you want to see your doctor.” I really detest having to write this, but I do not trust my government.