Healthcare: A Right, A Privilege, or a Responsibility

[President Decider]

To me, this was one of the most profound moments of the debate last night and a moment that I think Obama clearly established himself as a man on the correct side of the issue.

Brokaw asks, " Is Healthcare in the United States, a Privilege, a Right, or a Responsibility?"

Mccain then fumbles, stumbles and trips through his answer of it being a "Responsibility" Then Obama stands up and delivers in a bold and "as a matter of factly" tone ..."IT'S A RIGHT in a country as wealthy as ours"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uvXwqfjzi4

The approval bar when through the roof as the majority of Americans evidently feel the same way.

[dflprincess]

1. It's a right

which is why we need a single payer system. And I doubt what it might cost in a tax increase isn't any more than what we're already paying to the insurance companies.

[kestrel91316]

12. Cheaper in the long run if we eliminate the profiteering middleman.

[dflprincess]

18. E-zactly

I made my comment because Obama is running an ad in Minnesota (I assume other places as well) that refers to government run healthcare as meaning a big tax increase and that there needs to be some happy medium between that and insurance companies that deny coverage, blah, blah, blah. (He also mentions how God-awful McCain's idea is, no argrument there).

I just find that ad annoying and, except for expanding SCHIP, I really think Obama's plan for insurance (I won't call it care) "reform" blows and really isn't going to change much of anything. If it would, the insurance companies would be screaming blue murder about it.

[antigop]

2. I was so glad to hear that from Obama-- made my night! n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

3. Should be a right, in America is currently a priviledge

Healthcare certainly *should* be a right.

But, at present, in the US, it isn't.

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. It is an excellent question.

Not all good questions are difficult.

This country is based on the consent of the governed. The social contract implied therein is that our support of the government entitles us to collective benefit. This society has created plenty of money to provide health care for everyone.

As a practical matter, we are entitled to healthcare now, but because our thinking is really freakin' muddy on the issue, we do it horribly inefficiently.

Once you accept that it's a right, then efficiently delivering that right becomes possible. We're wasting money by pretending that its a matter of choice or responsibility.

[Iris]

35. I've often wondered why no one argues that we all pay taxes that help to fund

state colleges and universities. Given that, I then shouldn't we be able to reap some of the rewards of contributing to an educated society by being able to at least receive adequate health care without going bankrupt?

[madmax]

5. It's a right. n/t

[Overseas]

6. Ten Homes McCain thinks health care is a responsibility.

He'll give you $5000 rebate on the $10,000 insurance policy you will need.

He'll tax your medical benefits if you're lucky enough to get some at work.

He's gotta cut a trillion from medicare to give you that generous assistance.

Because he is dedicated to preserving the tax cuts Bush gave to the Top Two Percent, his constituents.

COUNTRY CLUB FIRST !

[Vinca]

7. Some people interpreted McCain's response as meaning it's

the government's responsibility to be sure everyone has healthcare. That's not how I took it. My interpretation was "every man/woman for themselves." He wants to plunk the responsibility on the shoulders of the masses who can't afford to pay for a week of insurance, much less a year's worth. "Here's your $5,000 - best of luck."

[President Decider]

8. If we weren't the richest country in the world, I would say Responsibility .... but we are.

There's no excuse EVERY AMERICAN can't be covered with the wealth that this country has.

Truth be told, Republicans want the best coverage for the wealthiest people.

That's not the American ideals that I believe in.

[jody]

9. Anyone who believes health care is a right should be able to cite that part of our Constitution that

protects it.

I have not yet read a rational argument for that assertion.

[kestrel91316]

13. If WE THE PEOPLE decide that it's a right, then it's a right.

The right to privacy isn't in there, either. Nor is the right to vote.

[jody]

17. You define a right so it depends upon the vote of a majority of the people. That means a right can

be abolished by that same majority.

On the other hand, rights addressed in the BOR are in the words of PA (1776) and VT (1777) "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

Our Constitution requires government to protect the rights of a minority even if it is one person against the tyranny of a simple majority.

I have not read a convincing argument that our Constitution defines health care as a right to be protected by government.

[sandnsea]

14. powers not delegated...are reserved to the people

The things not delegated in the Constitution are reserved to "we the people" to decide.

[dflprincess]

19. I like Thom Hartmann's take that if the Constitution says

we cannot be deprived of life without due process, how can we deprived of it because we don't have access to health care? He also points out that the Declaration of Indpendence says we are entitled to a right to life. And, while the Declaration is not law like the Constitution, it is part of our tradition.

[jody]

23. "access to health care" is one thing but forcing others to pay for an individual's health care is

another.

Society may write laws establishing a "legal right" to health care but IMO that does not make health care a "natural right" that exists independent of government as is the intent of rights enumerated in the BOR or un-enumerated rights protected by the 9th.

[dflprincess]

25. I gather you're not big on being forced to pay to educate children

who are not yours or to build a bridge you may never use.

Personally, I prefer to live in a "we" society, not a "me" society. As Wellstone often said, "We all do better when we all do better". And we will have a healthier, more productive society when everyone is able to get their healthcare needs taken care of. We're paying for the uninsured now through higher premiums and taxes so we'll all save money when people are able to get to the doctor for preventative care or when a problem is small.

[jody]

32. The question was whether "health care" is a right. IMO it is not a "natural right" although it

could become a "legal right".

The Constitution requires government to protect rights enumerated in the amendments and un-enumerated rights protected by the 9th.

SCOTUS has ruled in several cases that government is not obligated to protect an individual against criminals and given that, I don't see how SCOTUS could rule that government is obligated to protect an individual against various health threats.

Do you believe different?

[dflprincess]

33. I would argue that it is a natural right and that the right Supreme Court

might decide to apply the 9th amendment. Or, because many of the uninsured are paying taxes that give others access to care that they do not get, it could be an equal protection issue.

[jody]

36. IMO for you to prevail, you must convince SCOTUS to reverse itself in ”Castle Rock v. Gonzales” and

predecessor rulings.

See DU thread below:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=187599&mesg_id=187599

[dflprincess]

37. None of those rulings address access to health care they refer to police protection.

Though I understand the wrong Supreme Court might extend them to other areas and it is possible that the a more liberal Supreme Court would reverse these decisions (and yes, I know that reversing precedent is rare.)

I still have to wonder about equal protection if a person is paying taxes that, in part, pay for government medical programs that the person doesn't have access to because the make "too much" money, but still can't afford to buy themselves insurance. It's not unlike expecting someone to pay taxes in a school district but then telling them their children can't go to the schools in that area for some reason.

[jody]

38. I know they do not directly address health care however they do address protecting an individual.

In that sense there is a similarity between protecting an individual against death by a violent criminal and protecting an individual against death by an illness.

Since SCOTUS has said government is not obligated to protect an individual in the former case, I would expect SCOTUS to say government is not obligated to protect an individual in the latter case.

Obviously we will have to wait until SCOTUS rules on such a case.

Another point, PA (1776) and VT (1777) said in their constitutions, "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable/unalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty".

IMO the right to defend life acknowledged by PA and VT could include both defense against violent criminals and defense against illnesses.

As shown in the cases I cited, it is settled law that the right to life involving self-defense does not obligate government to protect an individual against violent crime.

Self-defense against violent crime is a personal problem and I would expect self-defense against illness to also be a personal problem at least as far as "natural rights" are concerned.

Of course the people's representatives could pass laws creating a "legal right" to protect individuals against illnesses as well as violent crime. :shrug:

[wildflower]

28. What about equal treatment under the law?

While it can probably be argued that health care itself is not a right, shouldn't the ability of people to receive equal access to it be a right?

For example, the fire department can't come to my neighbor's house because they have money, and then refuse to come to my house because I don't have enough money. (Let's ignore the fact that under privatization, that actually has been going on in some places.)

I think it's equal access to the health care that's available that is really the issue. At the very least, it seems to me to be a violation of basic human rights to give it to one but deny it to the other.

[jody]

31. My reply was to whether "health care" is a right and I argued it was not a "natural right" but it

could be a "legal right".

[Ichingcarpenter]

21. "To promote the General Welfare"

Works for me

[jody]

22. Please explain how that phrase translates into a "right" such as protected in the BOR or by the 9th.

[bluethruandthru]

10. When McCrap said it's a responsibility

he said "Of course businesses WANT to provide healthcare to their employees"... um, no John..they really don't. I think most business owners would be thrilled not to have that kind of financial burden. Alot of small business owners are in favor of Universal, Single Payer health care because they would have healthier workers and they wouldn't be paying the premiums...or having to only hire people "part-time" so they wouldn't have to give benefits.

[kestrel91316]

11. It's a RIGHT. Not one of us asked to be born, but here we are.

Breathable air, drinkable water, edible food, a certain level of health care are our BIRTHRIGHT. Especially if we are productive citizens, but also even if we are miserable failures or completely unable to contribute.

[TheCoxwain]

15. Delete dupe

Dupe

[TheCoxwain]

16. It is FUNDAMENTAL right with exceptions.

I generally agree that we have the right to get treated irrespective of who we are or our station in life .. the exceptions are when you are a patient with an illness caused by smoking etc which should have higher insurance premiums ( as you choose to smoke ) .. in all other cases the insurance premium should not price risk.

[whosinpower]

20. You don't need to do it that way

Tax cigarettes - and have those proceeds go to healthcare. That is all you have to do.

[jody]

24. Why not tax use of the internet to pay for health care? n/t

[dflprincess]

29. On the other hand...

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/15293006.html (published Feb 4 2008)

SMOKERS & OBESE COST THE HEALTH SYSTEM LESS THAN HEALTHY DO, STUDY FINDS

Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn't save money, researchers reported Monday.

It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. "But it also makes sense: If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years, and obese people lived about 80 years. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on. The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000.

[riderinthestorm]

34. See, I don't agree with that at all.

We own an organic produce farm. We also buy, sell and train horses. We are "out in the fields" all day, every day.

My husband just finished treatment for Stage IV lymphoma which has seen a 40% increase in the farming population (theorized that it is caused by exposure to pesticides and chemicals). While we don't farm with pesticides and chemicals, our neighbors are HEAVILY treating their fields.

So we've been organic for more than 20 years and yet my husband comes down with a (rare variety linked to farming) type of lymphoma that is most likely caused by our neighbors heavy usage of toxic chemicals. We have implored them to become more sustainable and environmentally friendly yet the corn/soybean profit allure is too strong.

Bottom line: imposing "risk" premiums for people like smokers isn't productive, as in your example. Non-smokers like Dana Reeves (Christopher Reeves' wife) die of lung cancer while life long smokers like George Burns escape without consequence.

Health care needs to be across the board. Take the "insurance companies" out of it. It's a human right.

[Yes We Did]

26. You are all Wrong. It's All Of The Above!

It is a right for every citizen, a priveledge for those who otherwise couldn't afford it, and a responsibility to the government to supply it, and make sure it's people aren't being taken through the wringer.

[StreetKnowledge]

27. Healthcare IS A RIGHT

We should all know this.

The sad part is that America should have the best healthcare system in the world. America spends the most per capita on healthcare in the world, and gets almost third-world quality for it - and 50 million Americans have a hard time seeing a doctor.

I've been living in Canada for a while, and that's one thing I must admit I am amazed about is the healthcare system. I wish that the candidates would come up here and see what I'm talking about. Walk in, get what you need, and don't worry about paying for it. The vast majority of any people would I'm sure pay more taxes or even a dedicated premium to get better healthcare coverage, so if the worst happens they can get the help they need. That's how it is here in Vancouver......and how it should be in America.

[iiibbb]

30. All three