How to Solve the Health Care Crisis in 30 Days
August 9, 2007 — Jacqueline L. JonesBy Jacqueline L. Jones
On Friday, Aug. 3, Bill Moyers Journal featured an interview with Barbara Ehrenreich, an independent journalist who holds a Ph.D. in cell biology. In researching her bestselling book Nickel and Dimed, Ehrenreich worked a series of jobs at $7 an hour to get a glimpse into how workers on minimum wage survive. She fell behind on her rent the first month.
I propose a grand experiment along the same lines. Let’s see how the members of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government would survive on $7 an hour for 30 days. Claims of executive privilege would not be allowed.
To make the experiment more “realistic,” we’ll also suspend their government-issued health insurance and freeze all their assets, forcing them to live on their earnings from their minimum-wage job. And, we’ll pretend they just started a new job, so they won’t get a paycheck the first one to three weeks.
During this time, and with a group of this size, it’s a given that several employees or their dependents will need medical care. So, what’s likely to happen when they try to get this medical care? They may be turned down at some facilities because they have no proof of medical insurance. They may be required to pay up front. If they can’t pay up front, they will have to go to a facility that provides medical care to indigent people.
I suspect that before the end of the month, the House and Senate will be bombarded with plans to cover all Americans. Some legislators will attempt to raise the minimum wage higher than the newly approved wage of $7.25.
And let’s up the ante a little more. If no bill passes by the end of the month because of partisan bickering, the experiment will be extended until a bill passes and is signed into law. I am certain we’ll have major health care reform in the first 30 days, with no time wasted on considering judicial appeals, and there will be no need to extend the experiment.
Fatima Hyder edited this post.
August 11, 2007 at 4:06 pm
This may prove the need to reform the system, a point which most people never argue. However, this will do nothing to come up with the actual solutions. Universal, single-payer healthcare will not work, perios. To find out why, and if you’re really interested in respectful, honest debate, I have created my own blog so I do not have to keep typing the same responses over and over.
August 12, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. My problem isn’t about having or not having universal health care in this country. It’s about the fact that we are the only industrialized nation that considers good health care a privilege rather than a right, and we waste more money and time trying not to help people than it would cost to help them.
Some countries mix public and private care more effectively than our country does. Some have universal care, and not all are having the problems we hear about in Canada. Let’s study what others do right, consider our own unique challenges, and do something.
Having money does not make one person’s life more valuable than another who doesn’t have money. In a global economy we can’t afford to lose anyone’s talents. Everyone has something to contribute. Even small contributions help make the world a better place.
August 16, 2007 at 6:12 pm
In response to an e-mail I sent him about his article The Wrong Health Care Debate, Mike Tanner, Director of Health and Welfare Studies for the Cato Institute, made the following comment I felt was relevant to this topic. It appears below with his permission.
August 20, 2007 at 1:15 am
[...] on August 20th, 2007. One of my readers respectfully disagreed with my last post. Martygrn believes universal health care cannot work in this [...]
March 24, 2008 at 4:57 am
[...] of my readers respectfully disagrees with my last post. Martygrn believes universal health care cannot work in this [...]