Recently, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the case against the Obama Health Care Reform. Concerned citizens have brought their complaints to the highest court. In its decision, the Court will determine the constitutionality of the proposed health care laws. Why would American citizens rebuff access to universal health care, a concept many of the world’s residents can only dream about?
It seems that some Americans take exception to the program’s stifling requirements. One of the dissenters’ complaints is about the demand for across-the-board coverage, meaning everyone must buy a health care policy. President Obama has explained that in order to offset the cost of covering individuals with pre-existing disorders, young and healthy people have to contribute to insurers’ costs by paying premiums for services they are unlikely to touch. His rationale fails to persuade many young and healthy people to buy health insurance.
The health care reform calls on individuals to purchase a minimum level of health insurance, which many find unsatisfactory. A low-level insurance package could cost several thousand dollars a year, and cover little beyond a portion of doctors’ visits and hospital stays. Low cost plans usually don’t cover prescription drugs, and they often pay a limited amount for hospital visits. By and large, insurance holders are restricted to choosing from a narrow number of in-network doctors. Furthermore, insurance plans use disincentives to prevent their customers from visiting pricey specialists.
Opponents of President Obama’s plan don’t want to be forced to buy anything, let alone expensive healthcare plans that give little bang for their buck. They realize that bargain basement insurance policies won’t help them if they’re hit with a biggie like cancer or heart disease. Serious illnesses demand extensive health services and tremendous outlays of money; the less expensive insurance packages that individuals can afford are unlikely to give sick people the treatments they need.
The Supreme Court will decide whether the reforms tread on Constitutional rights by forcing Americans to buy a commercial product. By June 2012, individuals will know whether they have to buy a product that might not be worth the investment.
Universal healthcare should not be a burden to U.S. citizens, and it should not cost exponentially more for those who don’t work for conventional employers. Self-employed people, unemployed people, and independent contractors should not be forced to buy expensive policies with few benefits, while those who work for companies take advantage of discounted, comprehensive policies.
Just as I broadened my healthcare perspective when I began working in other parts of the world, U.S. law makers should look to other countries as models of REAL universal healthcare. European and Scandinavian countries, Canada and Israel, have all figured out how to offer more or less equal healthcare to all its citizens, without placing such an onerous burden on some sectors of the population. A democratic country like the U.S. should not have discriminatory healthcare policies.