Page 19 - Layout 1

OPINION

The three major Federal antitrust laws designed to break up mo- tion. And it is an absurd notion because a right does not confer a
nopolies are: financial obligation on behalf of the federal government for you to
• The Sherman Antitrust Act enjoy such a right.
• The Clayton Act Nevertheless, when it comes to healthcare, those in support of
• The Federal Trade Commission Act. Medicare for all are quick to correct me (when I point out what a
When people are polled about Medicare For All, about 70 per- right is) that healthcare is different. However, I am not talking about
cent claim to be in favor of Medicare for all. The real question is healthcare when I am talking about rights and the role of the federal
what do they really favor? Are they in favor of monopolistic health- government. To be redundant, I am talking about RIGHTS (and
care or the idea that "Medicare for all" suggests FREE for all health- not necessarily healthcare) and the obligations of the federal gov-
care? These are two very different things. And make no mistake ernment protecting our individual freedoms and liberties and rights,
about it, Medicare for all would result in a single-payer system. A of which does not constitute a financial obligation on behalf of the
single-payer system is a monopoly! And to be crystal clear, a "single" federal government, are not designed to finance our decision to
payer system is not one where there are two or three or 50 private enjoy our rights. Thus, regardless what the "right" may be; guns,
payers competing with the single payer; it is only one payer! No free speech, healthcare, none of these so-called rights confer an ob-
more private payers. No more employer-sponsored health plans; ligation on the federal government to pay citizens (or non-citizens)
only Medicare for all…period! to enjoy such a right!
However, many believe that as long as their healthcare is free, The Medicare for all crowd also thinks the reason that healthcare
who cares if it is a monopoly? As long as the government pays for costs so much is because of greedy CEOs of insurance companies.
them to enjoy what they feel is their "right," they are OK having Take United Healthcare for example; the revenue in the third quar-
the government run the entire healthcare system. What are the costs ter for 2018 was approximately $56.6 million. The net profit was
to run such a massive free system for the benefit of all? A study by only 5.6 percent! In the financial circles, that is not exactly what one
George Mason University found it would lead to a $32.6 trillion in- would characterize as "excessive" profits. The costs to run United
crease in federal spending over a 10-year period. To put that number Healthcare was only approximately 15 percent. The remaining 80
in perspective, the annual receipts of the federal government to run percent of the revenue went to pay doctors, hospitals, and pharma-
the entire country is approximately $3.4 trillion and we spend an- ceutical companies! The CEO's base salary is about $1.162 million.
nually approximately $4.3 trillion, creating an annual deficit of nearly His bonus was about $4.9 million. And he exercised stock options
a trillion dollars! The study’s author, Charles Blahous, wrote in The of about $11 million. Added altogether, he took home about $17
Wall Street Journal that even doubling taxes would not cover the million. That represents approximately 0.03 percent of the 3rd quar-
bill for a national single-payer health-care system. Most people could ter revenue or less than 0.01 percent of the annual revenue. It is
not afford to double their taxes even if it meant they would get simply not a credible argument to suggest that healthcare costs so
“free” healthcare. much because the CEO is sucking out less than 1/10th of a penny
To put it mildly, free stuff is expensive, and when we talk about of revenue. Sorry to disappoint those that reasoned the CEOs are
free healthcare, it is enormous. And the politicians want to leave im- the reason healthcare cost so much.
pressions in the minds of the voters that since healthcare is a Bernie Sanders (and now increasingly the Democratic Party
"right," your time has come to have the federal government finance hopefuls) suggests that “the only long-term solution to America's
access to unlimited healthcare as a result of being a right versus a health care crisis is a single-payer national health care program.” Re-
privilege! However, is that what a right means? The short answer is ally? I am sure there are many solutions! The challenge is in the
a resounding NO! definition of the word or concept of “solution.” One person’s so-
Think about the second amendment. We all have a right to bear lution is another’s problem. And suggesting that the government is
arms. That right is part of the Bill of Rights enshrined in our con- the only solution via single payer is the definition of socialism. True
stitution and "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall believers in socialism have a view that ONLY the government can
not be infringed." Does that suggest if you cannot afford a gun, the solve problems of the citizens (and in Bernie’s case, even non-citi-
federal government will be obligated to pay you to make such a pur- zens) they govern.
chase? It is your right after all. And I think most would agree having Thus, if you like the efficiency of the U.S. Postal system, with
the federal government pay for you to own a gun is an absurd no- the compassion of the IRS at Pentagon prices; you’re going to
continued on page 20
visit us at www.bcms.org 19