Health care plans are inconsistent

Before his speech, President Obama declared two objectives: that all Americans will be absolutely clear on what he's proposing, and that all Americans will understand that he's willing to consider all ideas to make this work.

This second objective is so inconsistent with the first, that it speaks to a high degree of disingenuousness. As to the first point, his speech was highly rhetorical, and there was no honest disclosure and discussion of specifics.

On Sept. 13 (60 Minutes), Obama said a bill would be passed that reduces costs, gets control over the deficit, and will not affect anyone who has coverage now. He also said he'd consider any ideas which would get the job done. Do we really trust a government agency to run this efficiently?

Instead, I suggest we assume our national objective is to make sure all Americans have coverage and show proof of such coverage. We mandate that all drivers to show proof of having liability insurance. And we require all Americans to compulsorily contribute to the expenses of the government - it's called income tax. This is a far different objective to jumping into an ill- or non-defined even more massive government spending program.

All those not covered by a health insurance program should go into a "pool" of uninsured and be covered by a default government sponsored plan. They should be billed on a sliding scale according to income and ability to pay. Society already pays for the most indigent segment's medical needs. This approach would be the least disruptive of the above aspects, least disincentive employers, private providers, etc., and allow congress to do the hard work of discovering, and correcting, the worst abuses of the present system.

Louis A. Muno

Rolling Meadows