To the editor:
Thank you, thank you, Diane Carroll (letter, March 3)! Finally, somebody has said it. Health care is a moral issue! Before it's a financial issue or an issue of economic theory, it's a moral issue and we all should be ashamed to have allowed our fellow citizens to go without the security of health care insurance for this long.
Now that I've established that fact, I'm willing to talk about how to pay for it. These people who offer such dire predictions if we accept this new health care plan have very short memories. If you recall, Bill Clinton swept into office because Ross Perot, the deficit/debt hawk, split the vote. And do you remember all the hand-wringing about the debt at that time? And what happened by the end of the Clinton presidency? The economy had grown very well and with Clinton's sensible budgets, we had a surplus. It's not a straight line between now and the time our children or grandchildren inherit the country, and if you've been listening to other than the negative misinformation from the conservatives, you would know there are many, many things that can be done to save money, lower the cost to working families and to improve our health. As President Obama keeps saying, "It's a complicated issue." But one thing is clear. If we don't do something about regulating these insurance companies, soon none of us will be able to afford it.
And as for economic theory, my understanding of socialism is that it's a system where the government controls the means of production. Obviously, that is not what is being proposed. The Veterans Administration health care and Medicaid are paid and, therefore, controlled, directly by the government. For that matter, so is the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute. These agencies are maintained by the government and they control the issuing of government grants. We never speak of these agencies as socialistic, but they are. And they do a great job. And remember, too, that people who may be unemployed or underemployed now have not always been so and their tax dollars have gone into funding these institutions for years. Why shouldn't they benefit from the advances we've made in medical care in this country? That's not to say any human being in need shouldn't have the right to care. Fortunately, our laws and those of the other advanced, civilized countries and even the less advanced countries, support the idea that when a person needs medical help, the community must provide it.
Phyllis Leonard
West Newbury
