COMMENTARY
Chasing the dream of 'Free' medical care
By Dr. Richard R. Kelley
This is the first of two commentaries Dr. Richard R. Kelley has written on healthcare for The Advertiser. The next installment will appear in tomorrow's editorial and opinion pages.
With next year's presidential election campaign already well under way, the national debate over healthcare is heating up, with many proposals being made that would drastically alter how healthcare is paid for in the United States.
It's no secret that the current system has its flaws. However, by most measures, our country has arguably the best system of healthcare in the world. From most evidence with which I am familiar, the vast majority of Americans are satisfied with the healthcare they get. It would therefore be a shame to gut the current system in an effort to correct the flaws that make it difficult for some people to get health insurance. Instead, it would make more sense to focus on solving the problems of those groups rather than imposing massive government regulations and bureaucracy on those who are happy with their current healthcare and health insurance situation.
Please note that I distinguish between healthcare and health insurance. While it is true that many people, including millions of illegal immigrants, do not have health insurance, very few lack access to healthcare through our country's vast networks of hospitals, clinics and charitable organizations.
Activist filmmaker Michael Moore polarized the healthcare debate when he released the film "Sicko" earlier this year. He strung together a series of vignettes showing people who were allegedly denied healthcare for one reason or another. Then he focused on the government-run healthcare systems in Canada, England and — of all places — Cuba (whose citizens not only live in a police state, but suffer from a catastrophically failed economy that, through rationing, supplies the average family with little more than their most basic needs). He conducted interviews with people in those countries extolling the benefits of their "free" systems. He made a case that looks appealing — until you examine those systems more closely.
There's an old saying that goes something like this: "You can have your product or your service cheap, fast or good — choose just two." In other words, it's simply not possible to get all three. If you want something cheap, it may also be fast, or it may also be good, but it will certainly not also be both fast and good. And if you want something that's both fast and good, it will not be cheap.
In Canada's giant, mandatory government-run HMO:
According to a 2005 report by the Canadian Institute for Health Information:
Compare that to the health-care former president Bill Clinton received a few years ago when he experienced discomfort in his chest. He saw a specialist, had an angiogram and an angioplasty, all in a little over 48 hours. Most Americans receive nearly equal service on a routine basis every day of the year.
In healthcare, speed is often the key to better outcomes and survival rates. Betsy McCaughey recently reported in the Wall Street Journal that last month, the largest-ever international survey of cancer survival rates showed that in the United States, 66 percent of men and 63 percent of women are alive five years after diagnosis — about two-thirds, the highest survival rate in the world.
Compare that to 45 percent for men and 53 percent for women — only about half — in Great Britain, which has had a universal healthcare system for half a century.
It is worth asking whether the far lower cancer survival rate in a nation that has opted for a single universal healthcare system has anything to do with that system's inevitable tendency to ration healthcare. Because the predictable result of healthcare supply that falls short of demand — the universal hallmark of government-run universal healthcare — is long lines, long waits — and the deaths of thousands who literally run out of time.
As we watch the presidential candidates debate healthcare, we should ask ourselves the following: Knowing how quickly, effectively and cheaply government handles driver's license renewals, motor vehicle registration, public education, immigration, border security and a host of other services, do we really want it involved in delivering our healthcare through a giant government-run HMO?
And finally, we should keep these thoughts in mind:
"Magnificent promises are always to be suspected." — Theodore Parker (1810-1860)
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." — Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!" — P.J. O'Rourke (b. 1947)
Dr. Richard R. Kelley, a retired pathologist, is chairman of the Outrigger Enterprises Group.
