Are we civilized enough for national health?

(This is a 'think piece' not advocacy. I am not arguing against passage of HCR. Just noting that our political system and electorate lack the maturity or sophistication to do a good job of it.)

When the national government is heavily involved in national health the government must think and behave like doctors.

In professional practice doctors are, in general, scientifically oriented and not motivated to practice medicine in the way that will get them the most votes.

Unfortunately, in America we politicize medicine. It's not just abortion. Think of the HPV vaccine... Hell, think of vaccines in general. Think of fake medicine. (Why are fake medicines with no clinical efficacy whatsoever mixed into every section at the drug-store now? Why are there penis-enlarging pills and headache remedies applied 'directly to the forehead' advertised on TV? Because some Republican cranks in the 1990s thought the FDA was big government and thus must be hobbled.) Will people's health decisions be limited by whatever a bare majority of American Idol viewers thinks causes autism?

In practice, the more government involvement in health care the more Orin Hatch involvement in health care.

The grotesque political-football status the poor have long enjoyed will soon be extended to the working and middle classes as well.

Something has got to give. Our current political class and/or political system is, in fact, incapable of crafting rational healthcare policy.

When a lowly pharmacist plays politics, refusing to issue a morning-after pill, we are shocked. When a United States Senator seeks to outlaw the same pill altogether we shrug. Dog bites man... nothing to see here. (Granted, the Senator has no professional obligations as a healthcare provider, but with a national system a Senator is something like a provider, which is the point.)

"This is a sensitive, private decision that should be between a woman and Ralph Reed."

I will support passage of crippled, semi-rational policy that treats patients as characters in a medieval passion-play... but why should we have to?

So we get what we (The People) deserve.

With this type of Government things might be accomplished more quickly and efficiently
Every country in Western Europe and some in Asia have some form of universal health insurance. With a Parliamentary system, bills would be introduced by the Administration and the legislature could give its approval with only limited input.

And their representatives can block any and all legislation.

Why do you think that there are so many trade protections for agriculture but none for mfg or IT.

The voters are clearly the problem.

(Is there a "not sarcasm" tag? The voters really are the problem.)

WE are supposed to be the ones represented--not themselves,their buddies,their country club, not the lobbyists,corporate connections. We the people should not mean "I've got mine but in order to keep mine you can't have yours." It means I want to keep the gravy train for a few while the many can scrounge, do without or have bake sales to pay for medical procedures. They may talk a good game before election time but either have a memory loss once in office or can't fight the tide of the majority swimming, cowardly, in another direction. We have far too many that have a good thing and fear that allowing others to have a crumb or two might shorten their own loaf. The words "share the wealth" has never been the mantra for the corporate mentality and until we can get the movers "shakin in their boots" we will amble along getting very little results for the rest of us.

You kidding? We've got a whole party of repuges trying to take us back to the days of the old west...shoot em up...jail em...keep your women in line...etc.

That's what we are up against...

that it becomes an economic necessity. America simply won't be able to afford supporting the insurance parasites any longer.