If you can't pay for health insurance, should you live?

President Obama is scheduled to address a joint session of Congress tonight to make his case for healthcare reform or health insurance reform, if you prefer. This is a touchy issue for a lot of people because they either don't believe in the government safety net, or they don't believe a country with such resources should allow even the least among us to do without.

One of the biggest arguments I hear is from people who say-- don't mess with my healthcare.  I like things just the way they are. Others say-- I've got the money and insurance to cover me if something happens. The government shouldn't change anything.

The other big argument points to people who can't afford health insurance.  The pro-reform crowd has a lot of different messages, but the one that stands out to me highlights the need for government reform based on limited access because of pre-existing conditions.

First, we should examine the government safety net idea. Our country has sent a message since the Great Depression that if you can't afford to have your basic needs met, taxpayer social programs will provide.  It's a logical step to say, if you can't afford basic health care, our nation will provide.

Second, we need to consider the limited wealth of our nation.  Simply put, I'm not sure our country can afford to deliver on that promise established by past generations that the government will provide when we as individuals can't.

And finally, we should look at how we show compassion for those who can not afford to live, literally.  If we can't afford basic medical care, who can?  Are there organizations that have a cheaper solution?

No one will be completely satisfied with any legislation that's passed, but we should at least consider the long-term impact our leaders finally agree on.  Then, work to perfect it for as many Americans as possible.

No comments:

Post a Comment