Most Americans want freedom to make health care decisions

by Devon Herrick

"As a new Congress begins to look at health-care insurance options,
some of the members are discussing proposals for a single-payer,
universal health-care plan.

That's not the best solution. Senators and representatives would be
much better off focusing on health-care solutions that effectively
bring down health-care costs, expand access to quality care, and
reward patients for shopping around.

Advocates of single-payer health plans want the U.S. government to be
the only entity that pays for health care: With Uncle Sam picking up
the tab, proponents predict health-care spending would be reduced,
administrative burdens would be eliminated, and doctors would be free
to practice as they wish.

Do they really believe that adding another major program to the
federal government would actually eliminate administrative headaches
and make it easier for doctors?

We need only to look to our neighbors to the north, in Canada, for a
clear view of what we could expect under a single-payer system.

The biggest problem is the wait -- for office visits, diagnostic
tests, lab work, even surgeries.

There are only so many doctors and so much medical equipment in
Canada. That means that most patients can't get the help they need
when they need it.

At any given time, nearly 750,000 Canadians are waiting for a medical
procedure. According to a report by the Commonwealth Fund, 42 percent
of Canadians with chronic illnesses said they had to wait more than
two months to see a specialist.

Another major problem faced by those in a single-payer system is the
health risk that is faced by participants.

A recent study by the Fraser Institute indicates that much of the
health technology in Canada is aging and outdated. Such equipment has
a higher risk of failing, may be less accurate, and may not provide
the most up-to-date medical readings.

As consumers, we want is health care that is reasonably priced, of
high quality and that is convenient -- without having to wait months
on end for needed surgery.

Many of us have had experiences with limited access to health care —
through HMOs. Such plans tried to control health costs by controlling
which doctors patients could see, limiting the specialists that one
can visit, and reducing the options that were available.

It didn't catch on because few Americans like limited health-care
options. We want to make our own choices, based on what's best for
our health and our wallet.

Instead of wasting time on a system that limits our choices, creates
long waiting times and has the potential to jeopardize our health,
the United States should opt for a system of innovation and choice.

The best reform would liberate doctors to meet patient needs in
innovative ways, free patients to become smart shoppers, and allow a
competitive medical marketplace to allocate resources, while raising
quality and lowering cost in the process.

Mandates should be avoided in favor of making more options available
through consumer-driven health plans. Most such plans include the
expansion of health savings accounts to encourage greater
participation.

Patients with health savings accounts are significantly more likely
to talk to their doctor about treatment costs and options, track
their health-care payouts and estimate future expenses.

So, would you rather make your own choices on medical care and cost
options or delegate the quality, cost and timing of your care to the
federal government?

Now is not the time to move ahead with proposals for single-payer,
universal health care. Nor is next year or the year after that.

Instead, Congress should act now to let American consumers, not
federal bureaucrats, make their health-care decisions.

When we force medical providers to compete on price, we're all much
better off."

Devon Herrick is a senior fellow specializing in health-care
economics at the free-market oriented National Center for Policy
Analysis (www.ncpa.org).