In the United States constitution, our founding fathers laid down history with the laws that they found to derive the rights of the people of the United States. But our state legislatures and leading politicians decide to pass a bill that will alter the lives of our entire nation on the premise of what they think is right, rather than what is constitutionally right in our nation. When President Obama decided to pass the health care reform bill this past month, he imposed a life changing bill for everyone. This health care bill requires everyone to attain proper health care, and many people find their rights as US citizens are being violated. What are the opinions of the citizens of the US and how are they really being affected by this bill’s passing? What good could come of all of this happening? According to many, not much.
When speaking of a topic that applies to so many lives, it is difficult to find a place to begin. When one thinks of healthcare, thoughts of emergency rooms come to mind, and many people not being able to be helped to the greatest of the hospital’s ability because they do not have vital things such as health insurance or money to pay for the hospital bills. But yet at the same time, is it constitutional to require anyone to have health care? Much as it is unconstitutional to make a person shop at a certain store, or make them watch certain movies. What the government is doing is wrong. It is just one more thing that they are trying to control, but do they know what this type of thing could cause?
Upon doing research of this topic, many articles came up that gave a wide variety of opinions in this case. According to Mark Sklar’s article in the Wall Street Journal, “Doctor's Reflections on Health-Care Reform,” a doctor’s opinion of this health care reform is set clear in the opinion that it is not a good idea. In Sklar’s article, which is actually a letter addressing Obama and the other politicians, he states “…in 1990 I received more payment for an office visit than I am currently receiving.” Sklar speaks of this because he wants the reader to understand that the rising cost of health care does not in fact always return to the actual doctors performing your visits. Sklar then leads on to state that malpractice is a direct cause of this occurrence. According to this reading, if more reimbursement was given to first hand physicians, they would have more time to spend with their patients, therefore giving them more time to diagnose, rather than referring them to specialists, therefore lowering the cost of their overall health care. Sklar’s writings prove a good point from a differing prospective, which is helpful to us all. By seeing this health care bill through the doctor’s eyes, it gives insight to why malpractice may occur, and how the rising cost of health care is encouraging this event to happen.
Many people, on the contrary, believe in a more pro-choice way of doing things. In USA Today’s article by Susan Page, a recent poll taken has found that a small turn by minorities and people under the age of 40 has shifted in favor of Obama’s health care bill. It is understandable that many people find having health care to be something of great merit, but is it right to require its presence with every person? Having health care is a good thing in the event of an emergency, when one may really need it. But since people in today’s day and age have become more accustomed to a more free willed way of living, having decisions being made for them is not always something many people will be glad to have. America is not a place that can handle being grouped together. Take a look around when you walk outside; look at all the people, places, stores, and parks. Not one place in our nation is truly alike. According to Karen Tumulty’s article “America the doctor will see you now”, the bill has brought America’s diverse population down to a “one-size fits all” program that is diminishing the quality of our healthcare to bring up the quantity. Diversity is a word that defines the United States of America, and housing this many different ways of life under one law that requires every single one of our people to have a certain thing does not seem like the logical thing to do.
In my own opinion, having the right to choose your own way of life should always be the only way to have it. It should not be up to any one man or one group of people to make such a universal imperialistic decision. When something of this nature
applies to everyone in a nation, either more thought should go into it, or it should not happen at all. A smarter way of approaching this would be to just supply those who would want to have health care with an upgraded version of it, and leave it to those who do not care to attain it to just live the way they want. According to the opinion polls set forth by Mark Trumbull, “…some 55% of all Americans expect their own costs of healthcare to rise due to the passing of this bill.” It has even been stated in this poll that the quality of our healthcare being given is going to diminish.
Maybe one day the balance of political power and the common people will find its way, but if things keep going in this manner, who knows what will happen? This imperialistically dominating action that our government has pulled out of their pockets has shocked many. The only thing that is trying to be said here is that justice is needed;
things cannot be controlled in this manner. Our own rights are being tested by the control the government is trying to prove they have. What can be done in order to show the government that it is utterly unconstitutional for a nation of such diversity to be grouped together and forced to purchase the same very costly health care opportunities? The voices of all Americans are needed, to stand up and chose freedom.
Works Cited
"Health Care Law Too Costly, most Say." USA Today (2010)Print.
-This source, being that from USA Today is proven to be quite the reliable one in the fact that they must all check their own sources credibility before they submit any information to the public. They are interested in the general public’s opinion on this matter rather than anything else.
"Health Care". <"The United States Constitution". .>.
-This source is the actual bill that has been passed by President Obama, and it states all of the facts and information being pertained. Inside this website are various links that answer any questions viewers may have as I will refer to a few throughout my paper.
-This, being the actual health care bill set forth by President Obama, gives my paper more credibility and a better understanding of the plan that the White House is attempting to set into place.
"The United States Constitution". .
-The United States Constitution is this source, and it is plainly the constitution of laws set for our country by our founding fathers that distinguishes what is morally right and what is or should be deemed unconstitutional. The portion of this document that I am using as
my source is Amendment 14. “Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
- This source is helpful because it shows the fact that the United States constitution prohibits any situation where the state would deprive any US citizen of their own liberties.
"Health Plan Gains Favor." USA Today (2010)Print.
-In an effort to try to swing in the rojerian argument tactic of writing, I thought it would be a good idea to add in an article that shows a different side to this health care reform. This article is good for my paper because it shows the health care reforn’s acceptance in certain cases. This will be good for my paper because I will want to give both sides of the argument, in order to catch my reader’s attention and try to get them to see things in my light.
Sklar, Mark. "A Doctor's Reflections on Health-Care Reform." Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition 253.145 (2009): A15. Print.
-In this article, another important perspective is taken into account, a doctors. This article from the wall street journal is pertinent to my paper also because I am big on having all of my angles covered when I write an opinion paper, I like to know what each side is thinking and take them all into account. And having the opinion of a doctor is something interesting. You see, the doctors know more about health care than anyone, for obvious reasons, so why not see what they have to think about it? They show the general public’s opinion in the matter, that it should simply be deemed unconstitutional.
Trumbull, Mark. "Opinion Polls: Obama's Health Care Reform Law Not a Winner so Far." Christian Science Monitor (2010)Print.
-This article is interesting because it is based off of an actual poll taken about this healthcare reform. It shows the amount of people proven to be in favor of this bill, and how horribly it could effect everyone. Once again, having every aspect of my argument covered is important to me. And this article shows another side of the entire public’s opinion in a number based format.
Tumulty, Karen. "America, the Doctor Will See You Now." Time 175.13 (2010): 24-32. Print.
-This article takes a more sarcastic spin off towards this bill in the case that everything is being turned into a business rather than what is good for the individual. By naming the title “America, the doctor will see you now," shows the author’s sarcastic attitude towards this whole bill by showing how our political officials have grouped us all together in a very unconstitutional way.
