National Health Insurance For a long time now, there has been a cry by a number of Washington politicians for National Health Insurance. "Cradle to the grave" medical care for every citizen of the United States seems such a magnificent dream on paper or in the mouths of politicians. The present administration campaigned on a slogan of "A Comprehensive Mandatory Nationwide System of Health Care." It was called a number one domestic priority. There is currently an effort by many major politicians in Washington in behalf of the same or similar health plans. In what is ostensibly the greatest free enterprise system ever developed by mankind, this greatly disturbs me. Why should the United States seem so intent on change? The great from all the world come to this country for treatment. Such evidence suggests that our medical care is the finest the world has ever achieved. In England and other countries
where national health care is provided, the quality of health care has deteriorated. Why must the United States go down the same road? It has been shown that when incentive is abolished, excellence is rare. I submit that when all physicians are on salary, with politicians for bosses, health care in this nation will reach its lowest level. One of the reasons for advocating change seems to be the high cost of health care. All indicators point to a massive increase in cost if health care is socialized. Another reason suggested is that there is inadequate care in some rural areas and in the great urban ghetto areas. I do not see how National Health Insurance is going to alleviate those needs. In a federalized medical care system, the costs are likely to increase enormously. There is considerable evidence to support this. HEW estimates that comprehensive health care costs will range from S77 to 167
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MAEDICAL ASSOCIATION, VOL. 69, NO. 11, 1977
billion. This money will come from taxes. Taxpayers will be faced with another heavy burden. A look at Medicare and Medicaid suggests that government intervention into health care is likely to increase cost and cause cries of fraud. The government's handling of the flu vaccine is further evidence that this is not the best way. In other areas, such as in governmental operation of the postal service and control of natural gas, the evidence shows that both situations are worse now than ever. I feel that a free enterprise system of health care is the one way to stimulate continued excellence of service and continued scientific research. Medical care that is not competitive will be a disaster for this nation and our patients, who should be the first consideration.
Charles C. Bookert, MID 777
where national health care is provided, the quality of health care has deteriorated. Why must the United States go down the same road? It has been shown that when incentive is abolished, excellence is rare. I submit that when all physicians are on salary, with politicians for bosses, health care in this nation will reach its lowest level. One of the reasons for advocating change seems to be the high cost of health care. All indicators point to a massive increase in cost if health care is socialized. Another reason suggested is that there is inadequate care in some rural areas and in the great urban ghetto areas. I do not see how National Health Insurance is going to alleviate those needs. In a federalized medical care system, the costs are likely to increase enormously. There is considerable evidence to support this. HEW estimates that comprehensive health care costs will range from S77 to 167
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MAEDICAL ASSOCIATION, VOL. 69, NO. 11, 1977
billion. This money will come from taxes. Taxpayers will be faced with another heavy burden. A look at Medicare and Medicaid suggests that government intervention into health care is likely to increase cost and cause cries of fraud. The government's handling of the flu vaccine is further evidence that this is not the best way. In other areas, such as in governmental operation of the postal service and control of natural gas, the evidence shows that both situations are worse now than ever. I feel that a free enterprise system of health care is the one way to stimulate continued excellence of service and continued scientific research. Medical care that is not competitive will be a disaster for this nation and our patients, who should be the first consideration.
Charles C. Bookert, MID 777
