Time to get rid of insurance industry

On Sept. 14, there was a column by Mona Charen and the next day a letter from Peter G. Malone of St. Charles, both repeating Right Wing World's same tired arguments against universal health care. Charen wrote that if Obama's reforms are enacted, "they will drive private insurance out of the market entirely." And that would be bad - why? Charen doesn't really say.

Right Wing World's biggest argument against universal health care is "government doesn't do anything right, so how can we trust them with health care?" OK, so why do we spend twice as much on health care than do countries with "socialized medicine?" Also, why should we trust the insurance companies with our health care? They charge too much for insurance, raise the premiums for it every year over and above the rate of inflation, refuse to cover anyone with a chronic condition, look for any excuse to avoid paying a claim, and determine the level of care you get by deciding for themselves whether you need that treatment or procedure or not. It should also be noted that, although people in "socialized medicine" countries may grumble about the wait, none of them want our system.

Charen champions McCain's laughable proposals to address the problem, which include increasing market competition and consumer choice and a $2,500 tax exemption for individuals and $5,000 to families to purchase their own insurance. The remainder would go into a health savings account.

McCain, Charen, and Malone all assume that the reason there are 47 million uninsured is because these people have the money and are just avoiding buying insurance. None of these pathetic proposals will work because: 1) they will do nothing whatsoever to help those just barely paying rent and putting food on the table; and, 2) the insurance companies, like Big Oil, all charge the same rates from one to the next, and there is never any competition by one company to undersell another. In fact, it is just the opposite: if one raises its prices, they all do.

Other arguments put forward by Right Wing World include: people in "socialized medicine" countries have a long wait for health care; and their governments ration health care, and decide who should and shouldn't get it.

As to the first argument, who is worse off: the person who has to wait awhile to obtain health care, but doesn't have to worry about fighting an insurance company or going bankrupt once he gets it, or the person who insurance companies won't cover who avoids getting health care because it's overpriced?

As to the second argument, isn't our health care already being rationed when insurance companies base their decisions on coverage on their profits instead of what you need in terms of health care? Don't they already determine who gets health care in this country and who doesn't?

The time is now to seize the moment and, as Charen fears, "drive private insurance out of the market entirely." Introducing profit into health care was a huge mistake, and it is high time that health care was instead focused on making people well.

Charles E. Crouse

Elgin