ISSUE #1 -Comprehensive vs. Incremental Health Care Reform

In 2007 the censuses showed that people wanted some form of healthcare reform to take place. Experts characterized the vast range of proposals in two different ways: comprrehensive health reform and incremental health care reform. Comprehensive changes focus primarily on universal healthcare. The other uses incremental to expand existing programs to reduce the number of uninsured people. Comprehensive health care reform supportives argue that universal health care argue that overhauling the nation's health care system is the best way to make sure that equal access to medical care takes place. They believe that Medicare and Medicade have increased medical costs, and create a wasteful bureaucracy. They also think there is no safety net for the uninsured. Advocates of universal health care say the governement could become a single purchaser and act on the behalf of all patients. Another comprehensive health care proposal involves relying on government subsidies where the poor receive credits to get insurance with. There is also the hybrid system of universal health care vouchers where the government funds basic health care, and also elements of competition and choice. Care would be universal and there would be no eligibilty test. Patients could choose from plans for additional coverage if they choose. People in favor of incremental health care reform are not against health care for all, they are just against how comprehensive health care chooses to reach that goal. They think that government sponsered health care would produce poor care, and less competition for providers. In Canada and the United Kingdom they have universal health care. They also have long waiting places for surgeries. They believe universal health care would add to bureaucracy, inefficiency, and soaring costs instead of working to get rid of these issues. They also argue that health care is a huge industry, and state-sponsered health care would leave tons of insurance and medical industry workers unemployed. They believe in enhancing tax-free health savings accounts. They also believe in giving tax deductions for people who purchase their own health insurance. Overall they believe in empowering consumers with greater knowledge on medical costs and quality. If consumers pay the majority or at least greater quantities of health care insurance and medical expenses they believe that the market will start to rein in the medical costs.

I support the Incrremental Health Care Reform view on things. Universal health care would result in less competition for insurance companies as well as the medical industry, and that isn't fair to them. Universal health care would also result in poor health care. As stated above, there are places around the world that have universal health care. They have really long waiting lists for surgeries which is not something I want our country to deal with. Tons of insurance and medical industry workers would lose their jobs. It is important for consumers to have a knowledge and understanding about our medical costs and quality. The incremental route seeks to provide consumers with that information. Also, some people choose not to purchase health care because they don't want it. Universal health care would in some cases be forcing health care on people who do not wish to have it. The Republican Party Platform is very against the universal health care reform plan. They said "We reject any notion of government-run universal health care because we have seen evidence from around the world that government-run health care leads to inefficiencies, long waiting periods, and often substandard health care."

http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/06/co-ops-socialized-medicine-and-deregulation/

For More information on similar issues:
ISSUE #2 -  Ensuring Quality Care for Medicare Patients.
http://the-brack-blog.blogspot.com/2010/10/health-care-reform.html
ISSUE #3 -  Safe to Eat?
http://kristaschoolblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/issue-3-safe-to-eat.html