U.S Health Care Reform Bill: An Uncertain Future


I am writing this article sat slack-jawed, on the edge of my seat, in front of the television as we speak. Considering that nobody, not you nor I, has been allowed to actually read just what is in this piece of legislation, I have just witnessed the House pass the proposed $1.2 billion US Health Care Reform Bill. 218 Democrat votes in favour were counted, the number needed to pass the bill; a seemingly full Republican house voted against the Bill…save for one rather “interesting” vote in favour from a Louisiana representative. Forgive me, but I think there is some truth in the matter when I say only God knows what’s been passed in the fine print. Realistically, the Senate are the next body who will be able to make a difference to this result.

A rather unfortunate problem which also recurrently surfaces in British parliament in such similar scenarios, is that the party providing opposition to the reform has insufficient evidence to suggest any provision of a viable, structured alternative strategy to improve the ailment. This is the silence into which the Republican vote falls. The statistics indicating exactly how this will affect the American population are mindblowing. A reported 96% of under 60 year olds are proposed to be covered by this new centralised healthcare, leaving the remaining one-third of 18 million Americans excluded without healthcare (including legal aliens and American residents like myself. Ho hum.). The conscientious person amongst us asks, so where does the money come from for this? Good question! Funding is expected to come from further cuts from the already pitifully suffering Medicare program, (which certain groups insist, laughably, is in excellent operation…oh, pull the other leg will ya!). Of course this does not leave out the role of the average taxpayer (read: you and me); people earning $500,000 per annum can expect higher taxes of a juicy 5.4% surcharge. Not that I take this issue at all lightly but at this stage, I really have to laugh. Wasn’t it America all those years ago, who declared freedom from the British government on the basis of “no taxation without representation”, yet today the American governmental system insists on overtaxing it’s people for a type of healthcare that a majority did not necessarily ask for?

I have deliberately held off for months, from writing about this whole healthcare palaver. And with good reason. As a British person who was born under the British NHS, living in the US, I’m often expected to be the “voice of experience” amongst the opinions of a squabbling America. The additional advantage I would also have in this “seat of authority”, would be the lack of political subliminal influence which comes with being born in America. Two very important points I should bear in mind as a writer. This calls for great thought before offering my thoughts on this topic.

The one question I am constantly asked is, “What’s it like to live under centralized healthcare?” Realistically this is about as useful as asking the average, non-passport-holding American, “What’s it like living in a big country?” The answer to both of these is the same: “How would I know? I don’t know any different!” You want to hear the goodness and light version? Yes, the British people have access to ambulances any time they want, Emergency Room treatment anytime they want, frequent doctor appointments anytime the want, visits to specialists at at no extra surcharge and subsidised prices on medication and dental visits. Yes, we do have these benefits as a right. But it is by no stroke of the imagination, free. No, no, no. The British are well aware that regardless of whether they go to the doctor every 9 years or every 9 weeks, the payment for the NHS automatically comes out of their paychecks every month. It is a mandatory tax that can never be revoked, reimbursed nor contested.

At the last census, just under 61 million people live in the UK. My doctor’s office in West London has always been packed with people. It used to be that when doctors took their annual leave, your appointment would be rather inconveniently, rescheduled 3 weeks later due to backlog. These days if you want to see your NHS doctor or even your NHS dentist at your convenience, normal appointments have at the very least, a 3 week waiting list. It may shock the average twinkly-toothed American to hear this, but a general, rather silent check-up at an NHS dentist (see Ricky Gervais film ‘Ghosttown’ for a parody of the sour British dentist!) takes approximately 5-8 minutes; during which, you must request a “clean and polish” if you expect one, for a fee. And if I am being completely frank with you, in all my 29 years of being alive, an NHS doctor’s visit has never lasted longer than approximately 5-6 minutes, regardless of the severity of the illness – I am an asthmatic. Both my parents and records at my local London hospital will bear witness of the numerous times I have sat, unattended, in a dingy waiting room in Accident & Emergency (US: ER) having a 6 hour acute asthma attack. I vividly remember being partially collapsed against my mother, who sat from 11pm-5am with a blue-faced daughter gasping for air, while my father walked the corridors looking for a doctor, only to be told to wait his turn. Many a time I returned home untreated. The only benefit I’ve obtained from such experiences, is that I laugh in the faces of those who tell me asthma kills: if that sort of talk were true of all asthma sufferers, then I cheated death over 8 times in one year in 1988; many times more after that.

All Britons have triumphs and defeats within the NHS. If it hadn’t have been for the NHS, my dad might have died of blood poisoning when he was attacked by a Great Dane canine, who sunk his teeth so far into my father’s thigh he almost made a colander out of him. If it had not been for the NHS, the survivors of the July 7th “7/7” London terrorist bombs of 2005 might not be alive and well today. If it had not been for the NHS’ subsidised medication, I would have never outgrown my asthma as far as I have today. I do not overlook the successes of the British healthcare system at all. HOW- EVER. Unless you are in the minority who can afford privatised British healthcare, British people do not know any other kind of “better” healthcare outside of what they’ve experienced with the NHS. They cannot be faulted for saying the NHS “delivers a high standard of excellence” because the majority of us have no experience of some other “higher standard” healthcare! To many Britons, my descriptions are not unusual nor surprising. To many Americans they are horrifying; serving as ominous forewarnings for some.

Many agree that the current state of American health insurance is a mess which needs cleaning up. Is centralized healthcare a good idea for America? The future is uncertain and the outlook shaky from this point forward. Instead of hurrying unrevealed bills through the system, this presidency needs to tread very carefully to gain solid success with healthcare reform. Like democracy, it may certainly work in theory but in practice, you may lose a mouthful of teeth before there are any left to gnash.

  1. ynevar said:

    Well spoken and good points! It’s too bad that regardless of common sense opposition this piece of legislation passed.

  2. This is not a “centralized health care” bill, or a “government takeover of health care” as the new Republican talking point declares. What we’ll end up with will, for most Americans, be no different than what we have, with some important exceptions. No longer will Americans be denied coverage by insurance companies for pre-existing conditions. No longer will Americans be charged higher premiums on the basis of gender or medical history. Millions of Americans who had no access to insurance will now have an option. No longer will they be treated like animals simply because they were unfortunate to get sick without the means to afford access to medical care.

    As for the taxes on those making $500,000 or more, we’re talking about a strata that few live in and that has been enjoying tax breaks during Bush’s reign on the backs of everyone else. But Republican opposition just goes to show who they represent, as opposed to the majority of Americans who are clamoring for health care reform, and support a public option.

    This vote is, as you pointed out, just the first step in the process, and the final bill, if it passes, will contain considerable changes. This is not being rushed by any means, but is the result of decades of effort to change a system that has benefited insurance companies and pharmaceuticals at the expense of the lives of Americans. When big business interests are at risk, change happens in this country very slowly, and whatever passes this year will be full of compromises that will make many less than satisfied. But you cannot get anywhere without taking that first step, and today’s vote was a significant move to getting there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: