Proposition 101 is basically an initiative to protect the freedom of choice to pick your own health care plan regardless of any new reforms that may be initiated in the future. It would like to add section 36 to article II of the Arizona Constitution stating that “no law shall be passed that restricts a person’s freedom of choice of private health care systems or private plans of any type and that no law shall interfere with a person’s or entities right to pay directly for lawful medical services, nor shall an law impose a fine, of any type, for choosing to obtain or decline health care coverage or for participation in any particular health care system”(Arizona 2008 Ballot Propositions).
There are many and varied arguments for and against this proposition that need to be addressed an analyzed. One of the concerns of the people that are in agreement with this amendment to the constitution is that our freedom to choose our own health care options needs to be protected. They feel that in this current health care crisis when so many are without health care coverage that reforms may be instituted that will entail more government involvement, less freedom of choice to the consumer, and less quality of care as a whole. They are questioning that if our rights to choice aren’t protected and reforms are made we may see a decline in our options as to what type of treatment we would be able to participate in. Will there be room for alternative medicine, homeopathy, naturopathy, massage therapy, physical therapy, psychiatric treatment and dental care? What about new innovations in medicine? Will they, in the future, be deemed unnecessary or too expensive for the masses to afford so therefore not be allowed to anyone? These are all very relevant questions to ponder(Arizona 2008 Ballots and Propositions).
As stated in the beginning of the previous paragraph there are also many proponents to this ammendment who also have many compelling arguments. They say that it will limit future legislation and that we don’t know what laws may be needed to improve the healthcare of all Arizonian’s. They will also say that this amendment is unnecessary because it is not fixing anything. Opponents will contend that the United States health care system is flawed and in need of reform. That there are too many people without heath care and that people are dieing and being maimed for life because of this lack. Other arguments are that the amendment is just trying to protect big insurance companies that want to deny people their insurance because of pre-existing conditions, age, or inability to pay. This amendment, it is argued, will restrict the ability to initiate any reform that would make it possible to address change in health care and the problems that this country faces with the lack of insuranced citizens and the sky-rocketing health care costs that we face right now(Arizona 2008 Ballots and Propositions).
Before I address any of these arguments I would like to review health care reform attempts that have been recorded in the history of this country. In 1915 the American Association for labor legislation had an idea to make it compulsory for health care to be given to all U.S. workers. This proposal was rejected by the American Federation of Labor President Samuel Grompers because it was touted has little more than a “so called nanny-state” proposal. In 1930 President Roosevelt formed a committee to reform health care and meet the needs of a depressed economy. It was a universal health care plan that received so much bad press from agencies such as the AMA(American Medical Association) that it was completely taken out of the Social Security Act of 1935. President Truman supported a National Medical Insurance program called the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill that would draw money from the Social Security payroll taxes. It failed do to the bad press it received when the AMA warned the public of the socialized nature of the bill. A bill was signed and put into effect in 1965 by Lyndon Johnson that created our Medicare and Medicaid programs. In 1993 Bill Clinton introduced a health care bill that was widely criticized by Conservative and Liberal alike. Conservatives derided the plan as government-run health care and liberals argued that it made too many concessions to private insurance industries. Both sides agreed that it was too complex and confusing. In 2001 President Bush passed the Medicare prescription Drug Modernization Act which opened up the market for Senior Citizens to be able to have more choices in their prescription drug purchases. Also instituted was the Medicare Modernization Act which created what was called a health savings account(HAS’s) where American’s can set aside pre-tax income into their own HAS’s which can later be used for health care costs(Universal Health Care).
Some current facts and figures on this subject are that The U.S. is the only developed nation in the world that doesn’t have a tax-supported Universal Health Care Plan although it doesn’t take into account that people 65 and greater have a plan called Medicare and low income families have a program called Medicaid. The Kaiser Commission on Medicaid reports that there are 44.7 million Americans without any form of health insurance. It is also estimated that there are 16 million insured Americans that lack the money to pay their medical bills. Last but not least the World Health Organization estimates that Americans spent an average of $5,267 in the year 2003 (for health care) but ranks 29th in the world in life expectancy and 37th in child mortality rates(Universal Health Care).
Lets take a moment to critique the state of Universal Health Care systems elsewhere in the world. Canada has a single-tier universal system of health care that has been esteemed by the backers of universal health care systems in this country but it is found that more and more of it’s citizens are unsatisfied with what they are being handed. Survey officers from the Frasier Institute in Vancouver found that the Canadian system “produces inferior age-adjusted access to physicians and technology, produce longer waiting times, is less successful in preventing deaths from preventable causes and cost more than any other systems that have comparable objectives.” A alternative health care system called Medisys Health group has started operating in Canada. In order to use this new system you have to pay up front out of your own pocket. More and more are turning to this group for their medical needs. All government officials have the option to use this system. Workman’s Compensation boards are also among the ranks of users of this private health care organization. To add to this list of users would be the Canadian Mounted Police and the prisoners in the Canadian jails. You may be wondering why these have all chosen not to use the government health care plan. The answer to that million dollar question lies in the fact that the demand for healthcare services is not being met by the government program and the government doesn’t pay for non-essential or preventative medicine. People sent to private clinics also seem to be taken care of quicker and more efficiently than those using the government program. It is also of some interest to note that as of June 8th it is illegal to secure care or buy private insurance in Canada(Mary Anastasia O’Grady).
There are many and varied ideas out there for healthcare reforms. Rudy Giuliani(former NewYork mayor and former presidential candidate) proposed tax relief’s, reformed tort laws, keeping patients more informed on price quality and options available, and allowing consumers to shop around for their health care needs, even if that means going out of state(Giuliani). Researchers at the Heritage Foundation suggest that the answer to our health care needs are an individual mandate, an end to employment based coverage, and major changes in the tax treatment of health insurance benefits. They suggest that the Federal Employee Health Benefit program is a perfect model and individuals could buy into this as a replacement to employee coverage. Presidential candidate Barrack O’Bama does not favor a mandate but said in New Hampshire that his first preference was a single-payer system. He just doesn’t think that it could become law(Salisbury). Rep. Tancredo(R-Colo.) champions medical mal-practice reforms and association health plans that would allow small business owners to group together through professional associations to buy health insurance at a negotiated rate, and to look into the impact that immigration is having on America’s health care costs. Sen. Biden(D. Del.) proposes that the State Children’s Health Insurance Program-currently in flux in Congress- Would be expanded to include families with income up to 300% of the current federal poverty level($61,950 for a family of four) and to the young adults up to the age of 21. He also proposes to allow uninsured adults to buy into a universal program that mirrors that of the Employee Health Benefit Program and calls for lowering Medicare eligibility to include those 55-64(DoBias). John McCain states “My reforms are built on the freedom to pursue three goals; Paying only for quality medical care, having insurance choices that are diverse and responsive to individual need, and restoring our sense of personal responsibility(McCain).
So what are the benefits, or lack there of, of a universal health care system any way? The main benefits would be medical coverage for everyone, and universal coverage would be less expensive and more cost efficient than the current system of commercial medicine. Draw-backs? Take a deep look into the current state of affairs in regards to universal coverage in other countries that have it and you will find a plethora of complaints on everything from quality of care , things that aren’t covered because they are not cost effective, and astronomical wait times to see a Dr. for what ails you. Believe me, satisfaction in the arena of universal health care is not ,as they say, guaranteed.
I have many thoughts on the subject of universal health care. I feel that we live in a country that has always stood behind individualism and freedom. I do not want those freedoms taken away or tromped on because as Arnold Relman, the former Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, so eloquently put it “Since Patients usually know little about the technical aspects of medicine and are often sick and frightened, they cannot independently choose their own medical services in the way that consumers choose most services in the usual market.”(Universal Health Care). Excuse me but I happen to believe that there are many intelligent layman out there who are perfectly capable of analyzing their medical condition and choosing what to do about it. I also am a strong proponent of preventative medicine, alternative medicine, and new innovations in medicine and fear that if we are not extremely careful we just may find out that we could lose our rights to seek out alternatives that are right for us. No committee or government agency should be given the right to tell me what to do with something as personal as my own body.
Now, off of my soap box and back to the issues at hand, Proposition 101 and the right to medical choice. You may think after reading this piece that I will tell you all to unequivocally vote “yes’ on this proposition. That at all costs our right to choose must be maintained. After all I think that I have been able to get across to my reading public that I have some issues with the idea of universal health care and single-payer plans. But in summary I would like to say this: I do not have the authority or the power to tell anyone how to vote! I would encourage each and every voter to research the subject for themselves. This is a big problem in our country and it is not going to go away no matter how many times we “click our heels or wave our magic wands.” As for myself I have chosen to vote “no” on this particular proposition. The reasons I have decided to do this are relatively simple. I take exception to the part in the proposal that states “and entities.” This ambiguous term can mean anything. Even though I strongly want to protect the private citizens right to freedom of choice in health care I do not want to close the door on the fact that we have serious issues to address here. The word entities is just to broad a term. Is this a way to protect the insurance companies or employers from having to do some reform of their own? There will be further ideas and proposals in the future, you can count on that, and we need to look at all of the reasons for our current situation. I am not willing to give these entities a way out just to insure my personal freedom of choice. I also don’t understand how putting this into the Constitution of Arizona is going to really protect my rights any. Last I heard the Federal Government takes precedence over any state rule or mandate. If universal health care was voted in on a Federal level I don’t think that they will even take in to consideration that in 2008 Arizonians voted for freedom of choice in medical care. I think we can all agree on many of the issues and problems that we are facing with this particular subject. We can agree that medical costs are astronomical, that we are in desperate need of some answers to our current problems, and that there is far too many people that are not getting adequate health care due to economic status. Might I add that I am talking about the lower middle class to the middle class. These are the ones that feel the brunt of this crisis. They are struggling to make ends meet, many have to choose between health care and paying the bills or putting food on the table. They make too much money to be allowed Medicaid and not enough to adequately be able to afford health insurance. Finally, in this precarious time of economic crisis these problems are going to exponentially multiple not diminish. I will vote a resounding “no” on this proposition because I want it to be heard that this is not enough and I don’t want to close the doors on looking at all of the issues that may play a role in rectifying our current situation.
Brewer, Janice K.,Arizona Secretary of State. Ballot Propositions & Judicial Performance Review Publicity Pamphlet 18 29 (04 Nov. 2008) www.azsos.gov
DoBias, Matthew. "What the other candidates are saying." Modern Healthcare 37.47 (26 Nov. 2007): 25-25. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Gateway Community College, Phoenix, AZ. 8 Oct. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=27871596&site=ehost-live
Giuliani, Rudy. "Let the consumer rule." Modern Healthcare 37.47 (26 Nov. 2007): 16-16. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Gateway Community College, Phoenix, AZ. 8 Oct. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=27871587&site=ehost-live
Mary Anastasia O'Grady. "Americas: In Canadian Health Care Some Are More Equal Than Others. " Wall Street Journal [New York, N.Y.] 21 May 2004, Eastern edition: A.11. ProQuest National Newspapers Core. ProQuest. Gateway Community College Library, Phoenix, A.Z. 14 Oct. 2008
McCain, John. "I would solve the real problem." Modern Healthcare 37.47 (26 Nov. 2007): 20-20. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Gateway Community College, Phoenix, AZ. 8 Oct. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=27871591&site=ehost-live
Salisbury, Dallas. "Tough choices ahead." Modern Healthcare 38.4 (28 Jan. 2008): 20-21. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Gateway Community College, Phoenix, AZ. 8 Oct. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=29972180&site=ehost-live
"Universal Health Care." Issues & Controversies On File 23 Sept. 2005. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services. 14 Oct. 2008
