by Mel Rodriguez

Created on: October 30, 2009   Last Updated: November 01, 2009

I support the notion of having a system that can cover all Americans. Will that day come to pass, I believe not. The reason for this opinion has very little to do with political affiliation but with the health insurance machine that will not allow such a thing to happen. There are mechanisms in place right now that would allow a transition to universal health coverage. Medicare has been in existence since 1965. Expanding the coverage from that plan would be the simplest solution to universal health insurance. To include one more tidbit about Medicare, we already pay into it.

The crux of the matter is the insurance companies have Washington, D.C. under its control through financial contributions and fierce lobbying. Those in office want to stay in office and changing the way the health insurance industry does business is not a way to insure your chances of re-election. One day the American constituency will awake from its hibernation and realize that the government is supposed to work for the people, not the people work to sustain a government.

What would the ability of choice between a government run insurance and the present insurance companies bring to the table? Competition is the answer. If there is but one or two options to be had in a particular state then the cost can stay relatively unchanged. Enter a competitive option at a lower rate the consumer does not suffer the insurance companies have to become more competitive. That means that the private insurance company cannot gouge the consumer because of lack of competition.

Many would say that this view is to simplistic and there are many other factors to consider. I will concede that my view may be simplistic but it carries a lot of weight in the reasoning for a public option. The operative word is option. This means that you may choose to purchase another form of coverage. The choices that the consumer would make about his or her health care procedures are still between the doctor and patient not the government and patient.

Today, in the present system, insurance companies dictate what is covered and what is not. So, to make the argument that someone outside of the doctor patient relationship is not influencing the care of a patient is ridiculous. The point of this discussion is not to inflict wounds on one political party or the other. The point is to find a solution that benefits the American people not the health insurance industry.

Learn more about this author, Mel Rodriguez.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.