As we have learned in recent weeks the longstanding, “survival of the fittest” capitalist ideal is no longer working for our economy. How then, can we expect the same philosophy to work for our health care system? In a country that is so wealthy why are there so many not receiving the care that they need because they cannot afford it? According to the World Health Organization, the United States ranks no. 37th in health systems around the world. This great country is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system. Shouldn’t health care be regarded as a basic constitutional right, such as the right to bear arms and freedom of speech? The “basic coverage for all” concept has been successful throughout the industrialized world in countries such as Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and all over Western Europe. Why can’t it work in the United States?
One reason is that Americans just don’t see eye to eye on the issue. In the article, Getting the Party Started, from the journal Modern Healthcare, authors Gregg Blesch, Matthew DoBias, and Jessica Zigmond, answer questions concerning the different approaches to health care reform between Democrats and Republicans. The article was written one week before the Democratic convention took place and stresses the important role healthcare reform would play on both party’s convention agendas. The article defines the Democrats' position as “a proposal calling for universal health care, but stopped short of making it a mandate”(6). The Democratic Platform Standing Committee wrote, “We believe that covering all is not just a moral imperative, but is necessary to making our health system workable and affordable”(6). Although, the platform that would be adopted at the Republican Convention was not yet available at the time of press, the article suggests that the GOP platform was “expected to build in the free-market approach favored by President Bush” (6). A healthcare bill recently...