Maybe we should call it ‘freedom’ health care

Posted by Chuck on May 19, 2009
In : Health Care Reform,


Looking to the French is not unAmerican.

Looking to the French is not unAmerican.

Jim Landers of the Dallas Morning News has an excellent article on the views of former Texans about the health care they receive in France. The article tells the good and the bad about one of the best health care systems on the planet. It’s apparent that France’s mix of basic public coverage for everyone and private supplemental plans for those who can afford it, could prove instructive and perhaps inspirational to legislators seeking to reform America’s system.

The French and socialized medicine are two favorite targets of those who seek to divide America rather than unite her. The French were largely derided for refusing to blindly follow our adventures into Iraq, a bold stance that took American voters a few more elections to come around to. Might I suggest that France may be ahead of the curve on health care, too?

We pay substantially more than the French do for health care – both as individuals and as a society. They get house calls; we get long waits at the emergency room. Besides paying less, the French live longer and their infant mortality rate is lower. People in France are also free to see any doctor they choose, so there is another bogeyman that evaporates in the light of information.

Doctors in France make less than their counterparts here. But they also get free Med school and pay a mere fraction of what their American cousins do for malpractice insurance. They are free to charge their patients whatever they want, and the private market sorts those rates out to ones that are much lower than what we pay.

No system is perfect, and that, by definition, includes France’s. But when you see industry shills on TV cherry-picking the bad and sweeping the good under the rug, just remember that health care in the United States is a huge, incestuous  industry that needs far more than the nip and a tuck these talking heads are promoting. Count the number of pharmaceutical ads the next time you sit in front of a TV and ask yourself: how do the dollars spent here add to your family’s health care costs?

The French hybrid of basic coverage for all, private supplements for some, may be much more adaptable to America than the systems of some other countries. We already have an operating blueprint in Medicare. Instead of just covering our elderly, let’s take this program, which already operates more efficiently than the private sector, and expand it to cover everyone. The nips and tucks needed here are far fewer than the system as a whole.

Back in 2003, when France opposed our proposed invasion of Iraq,  some flag-wavers in Congress made its cafeteria rename french fries to “freedom fries” in a misguided attempt at patriotism. Perhaps the same linguistic acrobatics needs to be done with the French health care system. We could call it “freedom health care” – freedom to change jobs without losing your coverage – freedom to choose your own doctors – financial freedom to not go bankrupt because a family member gets cancer – freedom to get health care for a sick child, regardless of your ability to pay.

It’s not unAmerican to look outside our borders for solutions to the problems we face. It’s just smart. Let’s not let our arrogance get in the way. Sure, America has the best health care in the world – if you can afford to go to the Mayo clinic. But if you are in the middle class, wake up. We are paying too much for too little, while leaving a large swatch of our population out to dry.

Bookmark and Share
1 comment for this entry:
    1 Responses to "Maybe we should call it ‘freedom’ health care"
  1. #1 John Palys

    6. Central payer system:

    The Central payer would be a PRIVATE ENTITY auditable by some citizen committee and/or UGH!, the Government.

    The Central Payer (Insurance Consortium?) would get paid by taking a percentage of the invested return on the Health Care “premiums”. They would NOT be able to refuse payment for any reason unless you have exceded your lifetime cap, or the procedure was not inlcluded in the level you signed up for, ie: BASIC, INTERMEDIATE, or ADVANCED. Each citizen has $xxx,xxx,xxx.xx amount to spend over their lifetime depending on care package selected (Actuaries in the business or some group could figure out what this figure is and premiums are based upon that).

    They would have to charge REASONABLE rates for running the CENTRAL PAYER system. This could be determined easily prior to selecting who it would be.

    How payments are made:

    I get the bill from the provider(s). I check them and decide/argue with them over costs(I’m not paying $50.00 for qtips!!) – Then once we agree, Provider sends bill again, then I sign and send to payer who pays and deducts from my “account”. End of story.

    7. If I wish to spend my $$$ on natural herbs, accupuncture – even if health care person is “not accredited”, that’s my decision. Period! It reduces what I have left and if and when I run out – too bad, I’ll have to pay for it myself or not receive services.

    8. If you are out of “credits” bcause you used it up, too bad. Buy it yourself privately, or convince someone to give you some of their credits.

    9. We should be able to transfer some of our credits to another persons account. This would allow members of a group or church to help smeone out in need who needs some procedure covered that they normaly woudn’t get, ie: BASIC coverage – enough concerned folks could designate their transferred credits could be used for a SPECIFIC CONDITION or WHATEVER service.

    10. This is my favorite part – The government cannot spend/”borrow” any of the funds!!!

    11. In good years the investments of the fund could either be used to adjust premiums for inflation, a portion refunded back to each payer (an incentive to join), or be applied to “recharge” or increase your credits, or some combination thereof.

    I think if this type of plan were discussed, maybe we could get something better than what’s being rammed down our throats.

    Your thoughts?

    John Palys

Leave a Reply