A week ago I wrote a letter to the editor which described my hesitation and doubts about the pending Health Care Reform legislation that is in the forefront of American domestic politics. In that letter, I listed my doubts about the ability of the federal government to provide cost effective health care to all Americans without raising taxes, increasing the deficit, or reducing services. I posed my direct questions to our local/state representation. As of this time I still have not gotten a direct answer to my specific questions, but I have received personal messages from Representative Chris Smith and from Senator Menendez, both of whom assure me that they are working in the best interest of every American. Senator Lautenberg has still been silent in the matter.

Now a week removed from my letter, I am feeling less concerned about the prospects of our government controlling our health care decisions. Now maybe you are reading this and wondering how I could change my opinion so quickly. Rest assured I have done my homework. Here is some of the information that I have read since my letter last week. 

Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) states, “There is renewed momentum for a public plan that competes on a level playing field with private insurers. Any plan absolutely must be available to all Americans from the first day in order to successfully keep private insurers honest.”

Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA), “I urge my Senate colleagues to support a robust public option plan…. I'm for a bill that provides for universal coverage”.

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), “The time for meaningful health care reform is now.  We cannot stand by any longer while children, seniors, and working families suffer because they are unable to afford necessary medical care, their prescription medication, or a life saving treatment for a chronic illness”.

Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the goal is "quality, affordable, accessible health care for all Americans…health care reform is entitlement reform”.

MSNBC Countdown’s Keith Olbermann - points out that there is no higher human priority than health and therefore no more basic government responsibility than ensuring the care of its citizens.

After reading the insightful quotes and passionate feelings for the need for health care reform, so that all Americans can benefit from the government’s new entitlement program, I came up with a new mathematical model for health care reform. Today the Congressional Budget Office came out with a revised estimate for the cost of reform. Their numbers are…cost of $829 billion over the next ten years and reduce the deficit by $81 billion. Back in July the numbers were far different. In July the CBO stated that health care reform would cost $1.2 trillion and increase the federal deficit.

All of the numbers are well beyond most of our imaginations. So I thought that a far simpler and easier mathematical model was needed. In my effort to create that model, I spent many hours deriving the formulas, compiling the data, and calculating the statistical deviations. The final product of my effort is:

100 + 435 + 1 = 536

Now I know that you are all wondering how can a complicated problem as health care reform be brought down to such a simple equation, that answer is even simpler.

If our 100 Senators, our 435 Congressmen, and our 1 President are the first to enroll themselves and their families in the government sponsored health care package and give up their so-called “Cadillac” plans, I will whole-heartedly support this legislation. 

However, I do not believe that the elite that sponsor and write the laws for the masses will ever come down and live in the world they create.

1.      How can adding anywhere from 20 – 30 million currently uninsured persons not add any cost to the federal deficit? 

2.      Of the current uninsured population how many are –

a.      Healthy 18-25 year olds that do not want health care coverage

b.      Illegal aliens

3.      If the offset is by reducing Medicare expenditures (coverage, waste, and fraud), who will make the cost saving decisions, the patient’s doctor or an executive branch czar?

4.      Where will the additional medical personnel, supplies, facilities come from to accept this new influx of people?

5.      If the plan includes reducing payments to doctors and hospitals, would you not expect -

a.      doctors to retire sooner,

b.      students to reconsider the medical field if their future income was pre-decided by the Federal Government and not the free-market,

c.       and hospitals and laboratory facilities to close?

6.      What will prevent an employer that currently offers health care coverage from stopping? If a fine is imposed on an employer that is less that the current expense for health care coverage will it not be in the interest of a company to eliminate coverage as a cost savings method?

7.      Given the ability of the Federal Government in managing other programs; entitlement programs Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid (see above for a smoothly run program that will pay for Health Care Reform by cutting waste and fraud); or most recently Cash for Clunkers, why should we be comfortable allowing the Federal Government to manage nearly 15-20% of the United States economy within one program?

While I realize that it has been a number of years since I had my first economics course in college, I still think I remember one basic tenet:

            Supply:

-          Number of doctors remains flat or declines

-          Number of hospital beds remains flat or declines

Demand:

-          20 – 30 million person increase in the system

Where supply stays flat or in decline and demand increases one of two scenarios (or combination thereof) can occur:

-          Prices go up

-          Services go down