Critics bash universal health care

BY Dennis Geisinger

The call for universal health care echoes over our national landscape. With presidential debates at high decibel and politicians digging trenches over the introduction of U.S. Rep. John Conyer's (D-Michigan) National Health Insurance Act, hotmail is being delivered for and against a health care system in which each and every citizen would have full access.

And now that Minnesota is poised to deliver a universal health care plan for all of its residents with the broad legislative support of Sen. John Marty's (DFL-Roseville) “Minnesota Health Care Act,” those who oppose the kind of government-administered system proposed in the new legislation will most certainly make every attempt to convince voters that “socialized medicine” has no place in Minnesota.

Horror stories about existing universal care systems— like the one administered by our next-door neighbors, the Canadians— are already multiplying in many channels.

In order to sort out the issues, it may be helpful to look at who is making the arguments and who has the most to gain or lose with the adoption of a single-payer, universal health care system.
First, the raw facts. According to figures compiled in a July 2006 study by the Minnesota Dept. of Health, approximately 383,000 Minnesotans lack health insurance, 234,000 long-term and the remaining 149,000 uninsured for less than a year.