American Healthcare, Liberty, and the Liberal Democrats

A few weeks ago, in its weekend edition, The Wall Street Journal printed an article discussing an oft-overlooked aspect of many, if not all, of the current crop of "universal healthcare" schemes being floated by various Presidential candidates.

The key question is, as the article is entitled,

"Should Insurance Be Mandatory?"

At issue is a fundamental question of personal liberty which struck me because I spent the past week with my father. He contended, from when I was quite young, that Americans would most likely lose their liberties slowly, in small increments.

Universal healthcare is such an increment. Essentially, the proposition is that all Americans should be forced to buy into one grand health insurance scheme. No exceptions. Then we all pay, it is argued, for caring for the poor, sick, etc.

Sounds fine in principle, eh? A large risk pool over which to spread expensive societal healthcare expenses?

But, wait. What about the large component of individual health that is volitional, and individually determined? Why should I pay for your smoking, drinking, poor diet, and lack of exercise?

It's all well and good to focus on diseases or conditions which may be present from birth, and may be nobody's "fault." However, that does not mean we must subsidize those who, when relieved of the burden of paying, literally, the price for insuring their very unhealthy lifestyle, logically consume more of the free good that is low-priced healthcare coverage for their very healthcare-intensive lifestyle.

Why not simply let the market solve most of this problem? Let those who choose to live medically-expensive lives pay for that privilege, while those who do not, pay less. The truly indigent or those with medical conditions from birth can be included in Medicare or Medicaid.

What troubles me most about the recent frenzy over universal healthcare is that all candidates seem bent on taking one liberty away- the freedom to say "no" to mandatory, or any, healthcare coverage.

Little by little, if this mandatory coverage is extended, our lives will become drab and managed by the state.

First smoking will be simply prohibited, because it costs us too much in healthcare dollars. Next will be alcohol. Then expect certain foods with high fat content to be prohibited, or rationed.

I'm not kidding. When mediocre, small-minded politicians and bureaucrats get it into their pointy little heads that life now exists to be lived at the least expensive total US healthcare system costs, watch your lifestyle freedoms begin to be taken, tiny step by tiny step.

One day, you'll wake up and find that what you eat and do for recreation are regulated in the name of lower universal healthcare premiums.

Socialistic schemes such as mandatory universal healthcare will only remove more of our liberties, without truly improving our health, or healthcare.