Healthcare has been a pressing political issue in the United States (US) for many years now. Pertinent issues have always revolved around accessibility, costs, reforming health insurance, the social implications of providing a universal health care system and the extent of government involvement in the whole matter. The current president, Barrack Obama initiated healthcare reforms that passed both the House of Representatives and the senate in late 2009 after which he signed the healthcare bill into law in March 2010 to kick start a series of economic reforms that has over the decades eluded the American society.
America is termed as one of the developed countries with the highest healthcare costs when compared to the economic makeup of the country. Other developed countries have been able to achieve a universal form of health insurance for everyone but the US has in the past lagged behind in this respect. The Obama reforms are projected to provide health insurance to a number of Americans who have in the past lacked health insurance especially in this age where it is estimated that a great number of baby boomers are quickly ageing and exerting more pressure on the American healthcare system.
The new reforms have however sparked a lot of debate in and out of media houses especially on matters relating to tax reforms, incentives in the health care system, staffing issues, technological adoption of procedures in medicine and such like factors. Proponents and critics of these reforms have been able to marshal support from the general citizenry and build opposite opinions over the same issue. This study seeks to analyze these views in the context of a social and liberal analysis of the matter with a possible conclusion on the most appropriate analogy and perspective to look at the debate.
Social Analysis
A social analysis of the health care debate would propose a streamline of the capitalistic system of healthcare to make it conform to modern ethical principles. However, this system would still maintain and rely on a capitalistic form of production as opposed to overhauling the entire system to create a new healthcare structure. A social democratic analysis of the healthcare system would therefore seek to create a welfare state that seeks to cater to the needs of everyone by providing a system that empowers the citizens economically through economic democracy to secure their healthcare insurance (Eldred 3).
Socialism, as adopted in Europe encouraged gradualism which will little by little change the capitalistic economies to create a collective system of control. This analysis would therefore mean that the healthcare system can be totally changed to accommodate all Americans if the current capitalistic system which only provides healthcare to those who can afford it is amended. The social principles are in contrary to the Marxist principles which strongly advocate for a capitalistic system because social democracy purports that social system is aimed at empowering the working class in one way or the other (Eldred 3).
The social democratic system seeks to give Americans the freedom needed in seeking health care services and also the freedom from being discriminated against gender, class, or racial platforms. It also provides Americans the freedom from being abused by the wealthy and those in power. The social democracy theory also purports that health are reforms would instill a sense of equality in social, cultural and political aspects as well as to the marginalized in the society. Finally, the social democratic theory advances the fact that empathy would be given to the less fortunate in the society.
Liberal Analysis
From a liberal point of view, there is an importance in creating regulations or controls to the healthcare reform. For instance, it is important to impose copyright laws to protect against wrongs such as defamation. However, such regulations or limitations may go unchecked and in some instances, seem unfair. Nonetheless, proponents of this point of view purport that it is important to instill regulations on the healthcare system because it is the true mark of democracy. For example, it would be wrong to give people who advocate for murder the freedom of free speech (Eldred 4).
According to the liberal theory, giving restrictions to a small number of people does not necessarily amount to a qualitative compromise of the healthcare system but a quantitative check. Creating controls to a specific group of the American population can therefore be seen as a creating some form of liberal democracy like that which was applied to communist states (Eldred 4).
The liberal theory therefore advocates for the status quo in the healthcare sector because in the past, there were insurance controls on a selected minority of Americans (about 10%) of the population. The theory is therefore against a universal access to healthcare for all Americans because it is of the opinion that many Americans have the liberty to choose whichever category to fall into (either the insured or uninsured) and it isn’t the responsibility of the state to make such a decision on their behalf. According to the liberalists such kind of controls are not necessarily severe but meant to uphold democracy (Eldred 4).
Comparison/Analysis
The social theory seeks to create a state welfare that caters for the needs of all Americans while the liberalist theory discriminates on a selected few. Evidently, the liberal theory advocates for a status quo because the American healthcare system has been largely discriminatory. Its discriminatory nature has created a headache to the American population because citizens have always wanted to reform it because of its shortcomings. These shortcomings evidently represent the shortcomings of the liberal theory. The social theory is therefore an improvement to the liberal theory because it seeks to create more state involvement in the provision of healthcare to all Americans. In other words, it seeks to cater for the shortcomings of the Liberal theory because it eliminates inequalities and injustices created by the liberal theory. The liberal theory therefore seems to be retrogressive while the social theory is progressive.
Conclusion
A universal health care system has been achieved not only in America but in many first world countries as well. In fact, America being one of the world’s superpower should have been way ahead in implementing such a healthcare policy. The liberal theory seems to create controls on such kind of universal healthcare systems and history has proved it ineffective, hence the adoption of the social theory which advocates for the universal healthcare system implemented by Obama. Contrary to most critic views, this system solves many of societal problems brought about by the liberal theory.
References
Eldred, Michael. Liberal Vs Social Democracy. 2003. Web.