OPINION & EDITORIAL
Trovato tragically wrong on health care
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Letters to the Editor:
- Don't shackle free market approach (January 29, 2008)
- Neo-cons, not military, behind 9/11 (January 28, 2008)
- A cowardly display (January 25, 2008)
- The Grim Old Party (January 25, 2008)
- No Stipend Needed (December 12, 2007)
Related Stories:
- HillaryCare veils socialist disaster (January 29, 2008)
- Assessing a public necessity (January 31, 2008)
- Stop fearing socialized health care (September 28, 2007)
- Health care issue perfect for Hillary (September 20, 2007)
- I'll take a female president, just not her (December 3, 2007)
by Letters to the Editor
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Joe Trovato (HillaryCare hides socialist disasters,” Jan. 29) strongly argues against Hillary Clinton’s current socialized medicine plan in which the government provides, controls and pays for everyone’s health care. His column roundly rejects the supposed universal health care plan Ms. Clinton would enact if she were elected. I find it interesting that he spent an entire column criticizing this plan, because it doesn’t exist.
Mr. Trovato states that the answer to the current health care crisis is more choice and competition. In reality, choice and competition are fundamental to Hillary’s plan, which allows Americans to buy insurance from a wide variety of health care providers, and gives the option of purchasing a high-quality government plan. And, if you are happy with your current private health care plan, no problem — you can keep it.
Ms. Clinton proposes to help low-income families and small businesses by providing them with tax cuts to help pay for insurance. Under the Clinton plan, private insurers could not deny people from buying insurance due to a preexisting condition or drop them from health care plans because of a catastrophic illness.
Now let’s stop and think about Hillary’s actual health care plan. Does it sound like the government singlehandedly controlling every hospital, overriding every doctor’s decision and forcing us to wear red and eat borscht every day? I didn’t think so, either.
Ms. Clinton’s plan is to give everyone the option of having affordable health care through increased competition and efficiency. It’s not a plan to jam a single health care plan down every American’s throat. And while it seems like providing insurance for everyone is too expensive, it is actually economically efficient. When the uninsured end up in public hospital emergency rooms for diseases that could have been treated earlier, taxpayers foot the bill. As Dr. Timothy Johnson, medical editor of ABC News puts it, “Better to treat pneumonia early with antibiotics than end up in the intensive care unit on a respirator with lung failure.”
As a rapidly growing number of Americans struggle to obtain medical care they cannot afford, health care reform is arguably the most important issue in this upcoming election. America’s health care system is ranked 37th by the World Health Organization, not exactly the envy of the world. By grossly misrepresenting Ms. Clinton’s plan, by using buzzwords like “socialized medicine” — which talk show pundits have continually polluted the media with — Americans’ struggles are reduced to empty political rhetoric. We need to seriously and accurately evaluate all of the candidates’ health care proposals without buying into widespread misconceptions.
Nick Zaban
UW senior, biochemistry
zaban@wisc.edu
Anonymous (January 31, 2008 @ 9:21am):
"Under the Clinton plan, private insurers could not deny people from buying insurance due to a preexisting condition or drop them from health care plans because of a catastrophic illness."
Very much like the government programs that made it so that lenders could not deny people mortgages due to a preexisting credit problems or lack of ability to pay back the loans. I guess we can look forward to massive insurance company failures once this billiant plan goes thru?
Anonymous (January 31, 2008 @ 10:46am):
So basically, this plan has the govt subsidize the bloated insurance industry while providing Americans with sub-par medical treatment? Could this have anything to do with Clinton receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from the insurance industry since her first Senate campaign?
Anonymous (January 31, 2008 @ 12:36pm):
Which candidate is for putting the screws to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries? None? Why?
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
