People must receive the health care they need, not what they can afford.  Your ability to pay for medical attention when you need it is far too important to be used as a chip in a Washington poker game.  The “Binary Politics” system puts the legislature in a fatal embrace of “Take it as it is” against “Throw the whole thing out!”  This is a smokescreen as it hides the benefits of the law as well as the great cost to Americans.  A classical sculpture that inspires through history is not created by simply pushing a chunk of marble over a cliff.  My approach is free of unilateral party motives. I believe that, at this point, we accept the law in order to perfect the Affordable Care Act with the important changes it needs. Americans shouldn’t “go broke or die” but the industry providing that coverage should also not be based on 50 protected monopolies generally free of market forces, especially if every citizen is bound by law to purchase their product.  The concept that people are mandated by law to purchase an unregulated service is preposterous, let alone from a protected monopoly structure.

I also find the idea of a single-payer system to be very compelling, although I believe that the implementation of an effective and complete health care network needs to be ensured, with careful consideration to remove any “cracks” that subscribers could fall through.

For the long term future, I am considering the objectives of HR 676 (The United States National Health Care Act), which in its current form would create the following:

  • A single-payer insurance system, reducing administrative overhead by roughly $476 billion and allowing the federal government to leverage lower pharmaceutical drug costs by an estimated $116 billion;
  • An increase in the Medicare Payroll Tax from 1.45% (2.35% for high-wage earners) to a flat rate of 5% on all earnings;
  • Investment of $343 billion to provide universal coverage, increased benefits, and the elimination of premiums, co-payments, and deductibles;
  • Investment of $51 billion to cover the transition costs of retraining private insurance industry workers;
  • A private option via Medicare Advantage;
  • Patients still being able to choose their doctor;
  • A lifting of the burden on businesses to provide health care plans, which will help small businesses grow; and
  • A federal deficit reduction of $180 billion per year

And all it would cost is 5% of yearly earnings.  This may initially sound high, but it is much less than the 9% of income that the average American spends on health insurance – not including co-pays, deductibles, and actually using their health plan.  Through this system, we can reduce the federal deficit and ensure that all Americans receive quality health care at a much lower cost.

My reservations of HR 676 are addressable by ensuring the delivery mechanism is properly efficient and accountable .  These assurances will guide my acceptance of the proposal.  A stronger America is built on healthy citizens who are free to care for their health without fear of the cost or decline life-saving procedures for fear of ruining the family finances.  Nevertheless, this is not a solution if they instead die waiting for the care that is promised them.