Public Options
Anyone that says they can predict the long-term effect of any piece of legislation is either delusional or disingenuous. The Congress is now debating a healthcare bill that may, or may not include a “public option.” I have no idea if having one will be a good thing in, say, twenty years, but there is an aspect of the debate that bothers me. People argue this as though it was something new-uncharted waters. The United States has had publicly-funded healthcare for years.
I joined the US Air Force in 1958, and was instantly covered by one of the best full-coverage plans in the world. It cost me nothing, and covered everything for me, and almost everything for my family. There were a few restrictions, some expected, some odd. You had no choice of doctor, sunburn was considered self-inflicted, and they had a deep-seated dislike for chiropractors. However, my firstborn was delivered in a military hospital, and cost me nothing. The second child was delivered in a civilian hospital, and cost $9.00. I am currently covered by Tri-care For Life, a partnership between the military and Medicare. It costs me $150.00 per year. In my entire life, I might have spent $5000.00 on healthcare for my family of seven.
There are flaws in the current publicly funded systems, but none so grievous as to make me wish for something else. Although they don’t cover nearly as many people as the current proposal would, I would invite the congressional combatants to think of our current plans as pilot projects-charts for the water on which they are contemplating sailing. It’s less scary that way.
Tags: healthcare, public option