Hereford High School
Hereford, Texas

Teacher: N.D. Kelso

1st Jim Brett Campbell     2nd Edgar Montoya      3rd Melissa Cloud

The Great Depression forced the federal government to intervene and prevent the collapse of the U.S. economy. Under the Roosevelt administration, huge bureaucracies were set up to provide jobs and provide revenue to jumpstart the struggling economy. Unfortunately, since that time the public has had to live under the shadow of that inefficient bureaucracy and with a dependence on the government. The people have come to look to the government for a solution to all problems including the national health care crisis. Americans benefit from the finest total health facilities and services in the world. The problem with the system is that legislators, insurers and consumers are "passing the buck" and refusing to accept responsibility for the cost of insurance and for the cost of carrying the uninsured.

The problem with the present system is not too little government intervention, but the wrong type of intervention. If the burden of insuring were placed back into the hands of the individual, the tensions on the federal government and companies would be relieved. Proposals to force large and small companies to insure their employes is simply too great an encumbrance in these depressed times. Imposing these socialistic proposals overlooks those that are already uninsured; the unemployed, retired and self-employed would have to get coverage elsewhere. In a capitalistic society, even medical care and insurance should be a competitive part of the economic market. Removing the 12.6 percent of the gross national product spent on medical services last year could stagnate the economy. As citizens we have forced the federal government to take on duties that were never intended and neither constitutionally or socially right. We should not expect the federal government to merely "bail us out" by adopting a national health care insurance plan.

There have been thoughts that adopting a Canadian-style system would redeem our method. The American people would never accept it after being accommodated by the kin of care we are used to in the U.S. Canadians may have to wait months to receive a required surgery or to see a necessary specialist. Canada lacks the technology and innovations found in the United States. We have eight times more magnetic-resonance-imaging units, six times more lithoptripsy units, and three times more open-heart-surgery units and cardiac catheterization units per capita. Americans would be sorely disappointed with the available care in that system.

Democracy and capitalism are quickly being thrown onto the world scene as the government of choice. The strength of the U.S. lines in her ability to compete with a free-market economy. It would not be reasonable or beneficial to allow socialism into our basic structures through this crisis. On the eve of discovering that it cannot be successful, it would be folly to allow it into our own infrastructure. Socialism is not the answer to the health care problem. Independence and faith in our system will help to bring us a profitable and practical solution.

Although a solution to the problem will be neither easy nor quick, there are ways to ease the flaming issue. Congress should mandate that all families that can afford it should buy a basic package that covers major medical expenses. Families should not be limited to that coverage and should be able to buy an extensive plan if they wish. The federal government should cover families who cannot afford protection based on income and cost of obtaining private coverage. The well-off elderly should also be required to buy private coverage. If the federal government covered the majority of older people and half of those currently without any health insurance then it would be subsidizing about 20 percent of the population. This is the same amount currently under the Medicare-Medicaid plan. In conjunction with other measures, employee health insurance should be taxed, providing revenue and stopping the practice of over insuring.

Forcing the federal government or private companies to insure all of the people is neither constitutional nor practical. Americans are expectant of a certain level of care, and reforming to a totally different system is not the answer to the cost crisis. Controlling the limits of medical costs and placing the burden of payment on the consumer can be a practical way to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Streamlining the bureaucracy and administration to a reasonable level would save costs and lower premiums. The important guide to remember, however, is that we live in a free-market society and even health care should be a competitive portion of the economy. The federal role should be to insure all families against catastrophic illness and to insure those who truly cannot afford it.

Back