Introduction
Many debates have emerged as to whether the government should run a national system of health care or not (Giaimo 148). This comes after realizing that the health care costs are continuously going up. This leaves many Americans worried about the cost of their health care and health insurance services.
Some of the reasons for their worries include; their incomes cannot keep up with the pace of the rising costs, and citizens cannot change their jobs because of the fear of losing their health insurance. They are also pessimistic about being unable to pay their medical costs when they get old. This paper explains why the federal government should run a national system of health care.
Why the federal government should run a national system of health care
The federal government should run a national system of health care. The public should look at the way the government is running health care at the present time. This may include the military health care and the medical services that the Veterans Administration provides.
Citizens can also look at the state programs such as those in Massachusetts and Oregon (Goodman, Musgrave, and Herrick 217). By carefully examining them, there is no doubt that every citizen will agree with my proposal.
Many businesses in the US have decided not to provide health care plans because of the persistent increase of health care premiums at multiple instances as compared to the inflation rate. The high costs of health care placed on the employees have also resulted in their decisions to do away with health care coverage. Despite all these moves, both businesses and employees must still pay huge amounts.
This has been a significant stumbling block in relation to the country’s economic recovery. This shows that health care is increasingly unattainable for individuals and corporations, and hence the needs for the federal government to implement a national system of health care. A government controlled system can reduce costs and encourage robust economic recovery.
The other reason for the need of the government controlled system is that it will allow the country to build one centralized system with no wasteful inefficiencies. The current health care system requires a lot of paper work, claim approvals, and insurance submission among others.
With the government controlled system, time wastage in claims submission and maintenance of insurance information will be of no use. In addition, it will enhance cost-saving by avoiding banking and postal costs, and billions of money will go towards medical services.
The government controlled system will enable development of a national database, which makes diagnosis and treatment easier for doctors than in the current system (Newport 81). In the current system, patients have to fill a long medical history each time they visit a new doctor. This wastes time and money and can lead to patients giving false information resulting to improper diagnosis.
The separate systems also create a challenging time while evaluating data at the federal level. Moreover, health care insurance givers on most occasions decline from offering coverage when they get information about past medical conditions. The problem can cease if the federal government takes that role.
With a federal government controlled system, medical professionals will concentrate on healing patients, instead of focusing on insurance procedures, and liability malpractices among others (Boychuk 184). The current health care system is instrumental to many physicians leaving their professional careers instead of dealing with non medical headaches in the system.
A simplified universal health care system provided by the government will allow the health care workers to focus on providing patients with the best care possible. Medicine is a complicated subject, and the current health care system is making the profession even worse than in the case where the government runs the system.
The free medical services provided by the federal government will encourage patients to adopt preventive measures such as, inquiring about their health problems early enough. The current health care system makes it impossible for them to seek preventive measures because of the high costs associated with health care services.
This is one of the reasons why the government should run a national system of health care because it will remove this disincentive that patients have for seeking medical help. The government will provide free routine physicals, HIV tests, and mammograms. This will help citizens to overcome significant health problems.
The other reason why the government should run the national health care system is that, it will allow people to own their own businesses or work part time, by covering insurance. One of the primary concerns of Americans is the fear of losing health insurance or paying huge amounts on a monthly basis for the new individual or family policy. The citizens feel enslaved in their workplace and prefer to work part time.
They need time to spend with their families, engage in fun activities, and do other things before death calls. Some have great ideas in business, but lack enough capital due to the high health care costs.
With universal health care, these opportunities can be achieved. The reduced or free medical services provided by the government health care controlled system, will provide citizens with such chances, and hence will improve their living standards.
The government controlled system is the most suitable for America because patients with pre-existing conditions such as, cancer and asthma will get medical coverage.
The current system has no room for this, and hence the need for the federal government to run the system. The universal system will allow all patients to receive health coverage. The citizens can also move from one employer to the other without adversely affecting their health insurance.
Conclusion
The federal government should run a national health care system. This is because all patients, including those with pre-existing conditions will get medical coverage, and the people’s living standards will improve. The citizens will also adopt preventive measures without fear of medical costs, and the health care workers will focus on providing quality care to patients. Costs will reduce, and the country’s economy will rise.
Works Cited
Boychuk, Gerard. National Health Insurance in the United States and Canada: Race, Territory, and the Roots of Difference. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 2008. Print.
Giaimo, Susan. Markets and Medicine: The Politics of Health Care Reform in Britain, Germany, and the United States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002. Print.
Goodman, John, Gerald Musgrave and Devon Herrick. Lives at Risk: Single-payer National Health Insurance Around the World. Lanham [u.a.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Print.
Newport, Frank. Winning the White House 2008: The Gallup Poll, Public Opinion, and the Presidency. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2009. Print.