Future of American Politics

Increasing competition among insurance companies is actually one of the best parts of Obama’s plan. There are a few health insurance companies today that are dominating the market and this is one of the important reasons for rising health costs. To prevent this uncontrolled health insurance market, Obama and Biden will force insurers to use a substantial share of their premiums for patient care rather than for profit and administrative costs.

Finally, by guaranteeing eligibility, Obama’s plan enables anyone who seeks health care to have it. Americans don’t have to worry about being rejected from an insurance company because of their dismal medical history. While allowing everyone to have insurance, the Obama-Biden plan makes an effort to provide affordable health insurance for those with low incomes. Through their National Health Insurance Exchange, Obama and Biden will help individuals receive fair and stable premiums.

Looking at just these three aspects of the Obama-Biden plan, the prospects of American health care look good. A significant majority of the uninsured may now have health insurance at an affordable, stable premium. Universal health care can mean different things for different countries. For countries in Europe and Asia it may mean that everyone is insured, and the government plays a mediating role. For the United States, it means something entirely different. With different demographics come different necessities and different desires. Perhaps to the many Americans who voted for Obama, his health plan is their universal health care.

If other countries are experiencing increasing costs in order to sustain hospitals and the health care system, then how much better could the United States do? Although the United States is the wealthiest nation in the world, it is undergoing a $10 trillion debt and it doesn’t even have universal health care. The United States must adopt a health care system that can help the most people, not necessarily universal health care. Universal health care is just too expensive.

President-elect Obama makes a clear stand on healthcare: he wants to make it affordable for everyone. Perhaps President-elect Obama doesn’t promise universal coverage because it may cause greater strain on the government, which in turn will hurt the economy through higher taxes to sustain revenue. He has many ideas on how to provide affordable healthcare, but three very interesting aspects of his plan are to coordinate and integrate care for patients, increase competition among insurance companies, and guarantee eligibility.

To coordinate and integrate care for patients, the Obama-Biden plan supports providers to establish care management programs and promotes “team care” through setting up medical home type models similar to the coordinated care network system in Bobby Jindal’s health care plan. This would enable patients to get all their treatments at one location and encourage providers to coordinate their treatments more efficiently, especially for patients with chronic conditions.

Paying for those medical bills may now become easier! President-elect Obama has some proposals for health care reform that may provide for a large majority of the currently uninsured Americans. However, in light of the recent financial crisis, effective health care reform seems impossible. With that in mind, is universal health care even possible in the United States?

Many countries worldwide, especially in Europe and Asia, already have implemented universal health care systems. Many people are very happy with the health coverage that they receive. Rarely do citizens ever go bankrupt or neglect to go see a doctor because of the expensive health costs.

There are four different models of health care that many industrialized, wealthy countries follow: the Beveridge Model, the Bismarck Model, the National Health Insurance Model, and the out-of-pocket model. All these models exhibit regulated health care with a lot of government control whether it be on the entire system itself, on health costs, or both . Looking closely at these models, one can infer that there’s a huge amount of government spending to support them. In Taiwan, which uses the National Health Insurance Model, hospitals are going bankrupt and the government spends more to keep the hospitals functioning. Thus, although many people may be happy, the government is not.

The graying of America is also a key factor in rising health costs. Not only are more people qualifying for Medicare and Medicaid, but also more people are living longer. Thus, the growing size of the population is increasingly increasing the federal deficit: The government is spending more to cover more people. If only the federal government had unlimited amounts of money, everything would be all right. Unfortunately, the federal government is running out of money.

We can’t afford it. Not only are people going broke because of rising health costs, but also the federal government because it is preoccupied with paying the medical bills of those who qualify for Medicare and Medicaid. For years, proposals for health care reform have failed, leaving millions of Americans like the old man next door, aunts and uncles, and little children to suffer from illness and injury. What hope is the government giving Americans when there doesn’t seem to be any semblance of progress towards a health care system that could help everyone?

Millions of Americans are going bankrupt and suffering from illness and injury because of rising health costs. Many insured Americans are now joining the masses of the uninsured because of rising health costs. My friend’s parents never see a doctor for health-related issues because of rising health costs. Why are health costs rising?

The reason for rising health costs is the same for why other costs are increasing: new medical technology, more people are using the health care system, and because of the aging population. All these costs combined are creating this snowball effect of rising costs. When you take all these different factors into consideration, it’s amazing to realize how our government either didn’t see this coming or didn’t foresee a budget problem in the future.

The United States makes a huge investment in advancing technology to more efficiently treat patients and facilitate their recovery. But what good are these innovations when the treatments that they provide are too expensive for people to receive it? Health costs are rising at a greater rate than inflation and have been rising for years. As a result, the federal government is spending more and more money to support those patients under Medicare and Medicaid.

I’m a major capitalist. I support free trade and competition. I don’t like the idea of the government in businesses. If someone’s got a cheaper, more effective product than you, it’s your responsibility to play ball. You don’t whine and complain to your governmental mommy that the other kids aren’t playing fair. I have no sympathy for that.

So when I heard that the US auto industries were going under, totaled, if you will, I thought to myself–Good for the Japanese! Good for the Germans! If we Americans can’t stand the exhaustion, let’s get out from under the hood. I like my Audi anyway.

But now I’m not so sure. With Chrysler, GM, and Ford all on the brink of bankruptcy and the vice chairman of Chrysler telling the Associated Press that the collapse of one of these companies could trigger a depression, Congress has a huge decision to make. Chrysler needs $7 billion just to keep going, and GM asked for $4 billion immediately and $8 billion later, plus another $6 billion if the economy doesn’t get better.

Well, we know we can’t afford it. But do we do it anyway? And if we do it, do we keep bailing out every company that needs financial help to stay afloat? Do we drive ourselves into further debt, or put thousands of Americans out of work, decrease consumer confidence, and potentially kick ourselves back to the 1930s?

It’s an important decision. Get thinking, Congress. I know I am.

For the past seven weeks, I’ve been writing about outrageous budget related issues in our government. I’ve written about wasteful senators spending millions on projects that have little benefit, Bush’s addition to the national debt, Obama’s unrealistic reform promises, the Department of Defense’s amazing ability to misplace fighter jets, and more. But you know what I find to be the most outrageous? The fact that this website even exists. Our government shouldn’t be so wasteful with its money and it’s not right that despite so much talk of fiscal responsibility and so many warnings from vocal organizations and individuals inside and outside the government, we’re still in the mess we’re in now.

But we are in this mess, and at this point, just going for the easy options, like calling for more government efficiency and a stop to earmarks, won’t be enough. What we decide to do next requires a national dialogue to establish what we value and what we can cut. What we can do next depends on how willing we are to sacrifice for a greater future good. Keynes is right. In the long run, we are all dead. But our debt doesn’t die with us, and leaving our kids with that would be irresponsible.

While the nation and the government are figuring out how to deal with this imminent threat, you can try to figure this out yourself from your own computer. Budget Hero and the National Budget Simulator are two games you can play around with to see how hard balancing the budget can be. Of course, these aren’t perfect simulations (Budget Hero has limited options and seems to have a slight liberal bias while the National Budget Simulator is two years out of date) but they still show a lot and Budget Hero has nice animations.