Response: The Call For Socialized Medicine

Brandon Foley, writing over at Brandon’s Government 2305 Blog, has recently published a blunt, no-nonsense appeal for socialized health care, arguing that the net benefit is undoubtedly greater than the cost. I could not more strongly agree, but as a dyed in the wool liberal, that’s probably not surprising. Oftentimes leftist policies are shot down by conservatives’ attempts to narrow the public’s focus on the immediate costs (figuratively and literally) of implementation. “Your taxes will go up,” or, “You might have to stand in a longer line.” I am hyperbolically understating their argument to be sure, but that’s essentially what much of it boils down to. Foley, however, uses anecdotal evidence to prove that the status quo (with many Americans still uninsured) can just be as immediately awful. Describing a friend’s ordeal, having to crudely remove a tooth with pliers due to the inability to afford a dentist, he asks “Is this the type of care we want?” He follows, “With socialized medicine, we can provide some for all. It won't be high quality care for everyone, but at least it gives people something.”

Now, just to be an obnoxious know-it-all contrarian, I will say there is a definite danger from socialized medicine as Americans have attempted to practice it. Because we are so married to capitalism, government sponsored healthcare is often heavily reliant on the private sector. Personally, it seems the regulations in place are eventually going to force insurance companies to do away with independent agents, or at least consolidate the currently existing infrastructure to further departmentalize sales. Before the ACA shakeup, independent agents were an invaluable asset to the general public when guidance was needed in choosing a plan. This service was doubly beneficial because agents were paid commission by the carriers, making their service at no cost to their clients. Now, agents are getting paid less and many carriers are trying to kill them off, moving sales back to an in-house service. Although technology may help future consumers easily analyze and choose the best plan they can find, there is little doubt that having an experienced expert at your disposal, free of charge, would be a greater benefit.

I think the government needs to do more, particularly in how it helps Americans in their (often tedious and headache inducing) shopping to find an affordable, benefit-rich health plan for them and their family. If agents aren’t to be compensated or utilized, something will need to exist to take their place, easily accessible for anyone who needs orientation on the insurance market’s many twists and turns. Of course, “the government needs to do more” is the exact OPPOSITE of what anti-Obamacare advocates want. Still, maybe if we empowered those who could educate the public on health insurance, more people would understand the net gain of socialized medicine.