First, I need to say that I am no expert when it comes to health care or its industry. I am, however, familiar with how it works and have seen what has happened to costs in recent years. When looking for reason of why costs have increased, I have read countless opinions beginning with general waste within the industry, to fraud, to covering the uninsured etc., etc.. Bottom line is, health care costs have dramtically increased and not only crippled individuals but businesses as well. Often, it is extremely difficult for self-employed people to cover their own insurance and entrepreneurs that may like to start a business might not because of health care. These are facts and are irrefutable.
I was extremely happy to see the Obama Administration move forward with health care reform as one of their primary objectives. I have become less happy as congress has debated this issue, the concept of a public option has often gotten cold shoulders. Why? President Obama has stated publicly and is now campaigning that a public option is vital for keeping costs down and keeping the private sector honest. Why can't congress see this, as well? To me, this is common sense.
I have heard several arguments against insurance with any type of government involvment...I have heard members of the GOP state that 'the government option would be able to set prices low and the private sector couldn't compete'....Um, isn't low cost, high quality health insurance the objective? If they truly can't compete, perhaps they shouldn't be involved in decisions regarding the health of the public.
Those same individuals also agrued that 'the government will come between you and your doctor'....aren't insurance companies doing that right now? And last time I checked, the health insurance industry's primary objective is to make a profit.
When it comes down to something as important as the health of our citizens, wouldn't one want a system in place that was NOT designed to make companies money but rather one that kept citizens' interests in mind. When something is run by the government, we as people have a voice in changing it through the electoral process. If it is run by the private sector and there is essentially no competition(or very little of it), we have NO voice whatsoever.
Logically speaking, this would fall into the category of a "no-brainer" when deciding which way we, as a country, should go.