Medieval America

Yeah.

There is no excuse for a country as wealthy as ours to allow innocent children to go without access to basic health care. And if policymakers take steps that result in a net increase in the number of children without access to care, they have a moral duty to find a way to fix that problem immediately. As far as I’m concerned, the Bush administration is morally responsible for what happens to the children who lose access to health care as a result of these new rules. If any of them die or suffer permanent harm from a condition that could have been prevented with routine care (and it’s bound to happen), the Bush administration bears the blame.

While I think they are terribly misguided about the realities of health care policy, I understand that there are people out who, for principled reasons, believe that it is important to limit the role the government plays in providing health care to its citizens. And I understand that these folks believe in their hearts that if the market were simply left to work it magic, we’d soon find ourselves in a health care utopia where every child had top notch care. I know they don’t mean any harm. But people like this need to realize that this isn’t some grand experiment. We’re not dealing with hypotheticals here. When policies like this are put in place, real children–ones with real hopes and dreams and fears–are made to suffer. Some even die. And that is unconscionable.

Opponents of government-funded health care often argue that most of the uninsured in this country are so by choice. Putting aside the merits of that (very weak) argument, it is undeniable that children do not choose to go without health insurance. They have no say in the matter. It is therefore unacceptable to treat children as pawns in a struggle over policy principles.

Advertisements

About the other scott peterson

Writer of comics and books and stuff.
This entry was posted in Health Care. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Medieval America

  1. Ed says:

    *pppffffssshhh* there goes my coffee all over the screen….
    “Opponents of government-funded health care often argue that most of the uninsured in this country are so by choice.”
    Having been in that category, I can assure you that it wasn’t by choice. A third of my take home pay, from a job that paid TWICE the median income for my area, went to pay for a premium that offered little more than a hope of some coverage for catastrophic admit.
    I see this daily in my line of work in what is still called the ER, but as the uninsured become more numerous, should probably be renamed “the 24 hour clinic.”
    I don’t blame these folks for coming in, I understand they really don’t have a choice. The blame belongs mostly to the Current Occupant, but the bunch of morons in Congress are just as much at fault!
    *…off to make another cup, although now that I am fully awake and pissed, perhaps decaf would be a better choice…*

  2. Tom E. says:

    If any of them die or suffer permanent harm from a condition that could have been prevented with routine care (and it’s bound to happen), the Bush administration bears the blame.
    That will matter only if we have a Democratic Party that is not led chiefly by p—ies. Unfortunately, that can’t be said about the current Democratic Party. Harry Truman is a long time gone, my friend.

  3. scott says:

    Suppose, for a moment, that the Heritage Foundation were to put out a press release attacking the liberal view that even children whose parents could afford to send them to private school should be entitled to free government-run education.
    They’d have a point: many American families with middle-class incomes do send their kids to school at public expense, so taxpayers without school-age children subsidize families that do. And the effect is to displace the private sector: if public schools weren’t available, many families would pay for private schools instead.
    So let’s end this un-American system and make education what it should be — a matter of individual responsibility and private enterprise. Oh, and we shouldn’t have any government mandates that force children to get educated, either. As a Republican presidential candidate might say, the future of America’s education system lies in free-market solutions, not socialist models.
    O.K., in case you’re wondering, I haven’t lost my mind, I’m drawing an analogy. The real Heritage press release, titled “The Middle-Class Welfare Kid Next Door,” is an attack on proposals to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Such an expansion, says Heritage, will “displace private insurance with government-sponsored health care coverage.” […]
    But thinking about how we’d react if they said the same things about education helps dispel the fog of obfuscation right-wingers use to obscure the true nature of their position on children’s health. The truth is that there’s no difference in principle between saying that every American child is entitled to an education and saying that every American child is entitled to adequate health care.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s