Our own Dr. Paul DeMarco is as always dispensing wisdom, or at least good common sense, in his op-ed piece today.
As you know, Paul used to be a regular on my (old) blog, but he got sick and tired of all the pointless, childish yelling, and some of the comments bothered him too, so he quit contributing. But we remain friends and stay more or less in touch. And he’s one of those doctors who knows what’s good for what ails America: a single-payer health care system.
Here’s an excerpt from his piece this morning (I’d reproduce the whole thing, but that might step over the line copyright-wise, and then Cindi would have to call me and yell at me, and I’d yell back at her, and she’d go to her office and sulk until she thought of some more choice things to call me, then she’d come back and yell at me some more, and it would be just like old times, but I know she’s busy, and I don’t want to put her to all that trouble):
Ironically, the cure is right at our fingertips: Simply expand Medicare to all Americans. Canadians, who cover all their citizens with a system similar to our Medicare, point to it as a source of national pride. In the ’60s, they recognized that justice was the first principle to be addressed in health care; once they decided that no citizen should go without reasonable access to medical care, they were well-positioned to face the difficult but not insurmountable questions about what should be covered and how to pay for it. While it is clear that the Canadian system has its problems, there is little doubt that taken as a whole it is better for the average citizen. The Canadians achieve similar overall health outcomes as the United States while spending just over half what we spend.
Are there Canadian health horror stories? Certainly, but America has no lack of those herself. More to the point, anecdotes shouldn’t be the basis for health policy. The United States would have to address legitimate concerns such as waiting times and access to specialists if we adopted Medicare for all. But universal coverage will immediately improve the lot of the many hard-working small-business people with chronic diseases who are floundering without health insurance. My barber is a perfect example. He’s one of Main Street’s most solid citizens. His shop lights are already on when I drive by in the early morning, but he must rely on charity care because as an owner-operator, he can’t afford a health policy. His plight does not exist in Canada.
Americans are rightly skeptical of government and wary of our recent deficit spending. But the notion that publicly funded health care is a new and radical idea for us is nonsense. Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration are all federally funded single-payer systems that have been in place for decades.
U.S. Medicare alone covers 45 million people — 12 million more than the entire population of Canada. Some seniors are so comfortable with Medicare they seem to have forgotten it is publicly funded; at town meetings, they have argued against the public option as unacceptable government intrusion while at the same time singing the praises of Medicare. And although the empty claim that government-funded health care would be bloated, intrusive and inefficient has been repeated incessantly, the truth is that U.S. Medicare achieves satisfaction rates similar to private insurers while operating with roughly a third of their overhead….
Notice how deferential Paul is to mindless anti-gummint sentiment, with that “Americans are rightly skeptical of government.” Paul’s a very civil guy, which is why the blog makes him uncomfortable. He gives the knee-jerk anti-gummint types more than their due, despite his politely reminded us that so many of them don’t know what they’re on about (such as the cranky old people at town meetings who somehow don’t understand that the Medicare they love so much is a gummint program, which to me ought to be grounds for having one’s right to vote revoked).
And before you Ayn Randians get all cranked up about the failings of gummint, let me say that you’re right: Gummint has it’s flaws, just the same as private companies or the Church or non-profit agencies or anything that’s run by mere humans. But as Paul also explains, Medicare produces results at least as satisfactory as the private sector, at about a third the overhead.
As I said, Paul always makes good sense…