Home | Community | Message Board


High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineAncalagon
AgnosticLibertarian

Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
The Irony of Clinton's Medical Situation
    #3107832 - 09/08/04 01:50 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

Clinton Got Quick Care, Unlike Canadian Heart Patients

The speed with which President Clinton received quadruple bypass surgery provides an important lesson in health care reform that voters should keep in mind this election season.

Last Thursday, the former president went to Northern Westchester Hospital, near his home in Chappaqua, New York, complaining of chest pain and shortness of breath. According to the New York Times, "initial tests showed nothing extraordinary," but doctors asked the former president to return the next morning.

Friday morning, cardiologists performed an angiogram. One reported seeing "multi-vessel coronary artery disease, normal heart function and no heart attack." However, the extent of the blockage in his coronary arteries was severe enough that doctors sent him to Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital in Manhattan.

Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), said that when doctors at Columbia-Presbyterian saw the extent of the blockage, "[t]hey did advise him to have bypass surgery, and to do it as soon as he could." Columbia-Presbyterian admitted the former president Friday and performed a successful quadruple bypass Monday.

The timeframe is important.

President and Senator Clinton's greatest health care legacy is their attempt to pass the Health Security Act in 1993 and 1994. At the time, it was said that 39 million Americans lacked health insurance. President Clinton made "health coverage that cannot be taken away" his administration's top priority, and planned to make good on that promise by turning America's health care system over to the federal government.

Under the Clinton Health Security Act, the federal government would have compelled all Americans to buy health coverage, dictated what type of coverage they would receive and where they would purchase it, set prices for coverage and medical services, and encouraged states to form their own single-payer health care systems.

The power of individuals to make countless choices about their health care would have been handed over to government, and the few remaining market mechanisms that contain costs and promote quality would have been lost.

The Economist wrote of the Clinton health plan, "Not since Franklin Roosevelt's War Production Board has it been suggested that so large a part of the American economy should suddenly be brought under government control."

Critics warned that socialized medicine would have the same effect in America as it has in other countries.

When government makes medical care "free," people demand medical care without regard to cost. Governments can't keep up with the excess demand and therefore must find some way of allocating care amid shortage conditions. Most choose to make patients wait.

According to Nadeem Esmail and Michael Walker of Canada's Fraser Institute, the median wait for an appointment with a cardiologist in Canada's single-payer health care system was 3.4 weeks in 2003. The wait for urgent bypass surgery was another 2.1 weeks on top of that, while the wait for elective bypass surgery was an additional 10.7 weeks. Canadian doctors reported a "reasonable" wait would be 0.9 and 6.1 weeks, respectively. Great Britain and New Zealand have even longer waiting times for bypass surgery.

Esmail and Walker cite studies confirming that longer waits for heart surgery result in a higher risk of heart attack and death.

In fact, they report American hospitals act as a "safety valve" for Canadian patients who face life-threatening shortages: "The government of British Columbia contracted Washington State hospitals to perform some 200 operations in 1989 following public dismay over the 6-month waiting list for cardiac bypass surgery in the province... A California heart-surgery centre has even advertised its services in a Vancouver newspaper."

Had America had followed his lead ten years ago, President Clinton might not have been able to get his diagnosis and surgery appointment so quickly.

Instead of waiting overnight for an appointment with a cardiologist, he might have had to wait the 3.4 weeks Canadians do.

Instead of waiting three days for quadruple bypass surgery, he might have had to wait over two weeks.

Instead of receiving care from what Senator Clinton called "one of the great hospitals in the world," President Clinton might be looking for a safety valve.

Since the Clinton health plan was defeated, untold patients have been aided because America's health care system, whatever its faults, was not subjected to the shortages and waiting lines that plague other nations.

But the future is less certain. Democratic presidential candidate Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA) is aggressively promoting his $1 trillion health care plan that borrows heavily from the Clinton health plan. Senator Kerry too seems to believe that having government issue a paper guarantee of "coverage" is the same thing as having access to medical care.

Truth be told, presidents and senators will never have a hard time getting medical treatment. Esmail and Walker report "a profusion of recent research reveals that cardiovascular surgery queues are routinely jumped by the famous and politically-connected." It's the rest who have to wait. Despite the Canadian government's egalitarian rhetoric, "low-income Canadians have less access to specialists, particularly cardiovascular ones, and have lower cardiovascular and cancer survival rates than their higher-income neighbours."

I join all Americans of good will in wishing President Clinton a speedy recovery. And I hope they will join me in wishing Senator Kerry's health plan a quick, painless death.

The speed with which President Clinton received quadruple bypass surgery provides an important lesson in health care reform that voters should keep in mind this election season.

Last Thursday, the former president went to Northern Westchester Hospital, near his home in Chappaqua, New York, complaining of chest pain and shortness of breath. According to the New York Times, "initial tests showed nothing extraordinary," but doctors asked the former president to return the next morning.

Friday morning, cardiologists performed an angiogram. One reported seeing "multi-vessel coronary artery disease, normal heart function and no heart attack." However, the extent of the blockage in his coronary arteries was severe enough that doctors sent him to Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital in Manhattan.

Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), said that when doctors at Columbia-Presbyterian saw the extent of the blockage, "[t]hey did advise him to have bypass surgery, and to do it as soon as he could." Columbia-Presbyterian admitted the former president Friday and performed a successful quadruple bypass Monday.

The timeframe is important.

President and Senator Clinton's greatest health care legacy is their attempt to pass the Health Security Act in 1993 and 1994. At the time, it was said that 39 million Americans lacked health insurance. President Clinton made "health coverage that cannot be taken away" his administration's top priority, and planned to make good on that promise by turning America's health care system over to the federal government.

Under the Clinton Health Security Act, the federal government would have compelled all Americans to buy health coverage, dictated what type of coverage they would receive and where they would purchase it, set prices for coverage and medical services, and encouraged states to form their own single-payer health care systems.

The power of individuals to make countless choices about their health care would have been handed over to government, and the few remaining market mechanisms that contain costs and promote quality would have been lost.

The Economist wrote of the Clinton health plan, "Not since Franklin Roosevelt's War Production Board has it been suggested that so large a part of the American economy should suddenly be brought under government control."

Critics warned that socialized medicine would have the same effect in America as it has in other countries.

When government makes medical care "free," people demand medical care without regard to cost. Governments can't keep up with the excess demand and therefore must find some way of allocating care amid shortage conditions. Most choose to make patients wait.

According to Nadeem Esmail and Michael Walker of Canada's Fraser Institute, the median wait for an appointment with a cardiologist in Canada's single-payer health care system was 3.4 weeks in 2003. The wait for urgent bypass surgery was another 2.1 weeks on top of that, while the wait for elective bypass surgery was an additional 10.7 weeks. Canadian doctors reported a "reasonable" wait would be 0.9 and 6.1 weeks, respectively. Great Britain and New Zealand have even longer waiting times for bypass surgery.

Esmail and Walker cite studies confirming that longer waits for heart surgery result in a higher risk of heart attack and death.

In fact, they report American hospitals act as a "safety valve" for Canadian patients who face life-threatening shortages: "The government of British Columbia contracted Washington State hospitals to perform some 200 operations in 1989 following public dismay over the 6-month waiting list for cardiac bypass surgery in the province... A California heart-surgery centre has even advertised its services in a Vancouver newspaper."

Had America had followed his lead ten years ago, President Clinton might not have been able to get his diagnosis and surgery appointment so quickly.

Instead of waiting overnight for an appointment with a cardiologist, he might have had to wait the 3.4 weeks Canadians do.

Instead of waiting three days for quadruple bypass surgery, he might have had to wait over two weeks.

Instead of receiving care from what Senator Clinton called "one of the great hospitals in the world," President Clinton might be looking for a safety valve.

Since the Clinton health plan was defeated, untold patients have been aided because America's health care system, whatever its faults, was not subjected to the shortages and waiting lines that plague other nations.

But the future is less certain. Democratic presidential candidate Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA) is aggressively promoting his $1 trillion health care plan that borrows heavily from the Clinton health plan. Senator Kerry too seems to believe that having government issue a paper guarantee of "coverage" is the same thing as having access to medical care.

Truth be told, presidents and senators will never have a hard time getting medical treatment. Esmail and Walker report "a profusion of recent research reveals that cardiovascular surgery queues are routinely jumped by the famous and politically-connected." It's the rest who have to wait. Despite the Canadian government's egalitarian rhetoric, "low-income Canadians have less access to specialists, particularly cardiovascular ones, and have lower cardiovascular and cancer survival rates than their higher-income neighbours."

I join all Americans of good will in wishing President Clinton a speedy recovery. And I hope they will join me in wishing Senator Kerry's health plan a quick, painless death.



--------------------
?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAncalagon
AgnosticLibertarian

Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: The Irony of Clinton's Medical Situation [Re: Ancalagon]
    #3107854 - 09/08/04 01:57 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

An Open Letter to Bill Clinton

Dear Mr. Clinton:

Like many other Americans, I was sorry to hear of your health misfortunes. While open-heart surgery has become routine in this country, we should never forget that it is a very dangerous and serious operation, and I can only hope that you will have a full recovery.

The purpose of this letter, however, is not to wish you better health. No, I am writing this letter because I can only hope that this experience will help you to understand what a disaster you and your wife almost forced upon this country a decade ago when "HillaryCare" dominated the news. At the time, you claimed that "selfish special interests" were behind the failure of your wife?s plan to ultimately push the country into a Canadian-style health system in which government controls all medical care.

Two months ago, I also found myself in the care of a cardiologist. Like you, I came to the hospital after suffering from severe chest pains and, like you, the doctor found a number of blockages in three of my arteries. However, unlike you, I underwent the less-invasive angioplasty procedure. Nevertheless, it always is a frightening experience to know that one?s circulatory system is not functioning properly and that I surely had been facing a heart attack had my wife not insisted I go to the hospital.

In this politicized age, no doubt someone will say that it is not "fair" that Bill Clinton is able to have surgery paid through his insurance, while large numbers of Americans do not have health coverage at all. Like the "economist" Paul Krugman, they will insist on a "free" government plan that provides "equal care for all" at a fraction of the present cost.

In fact, your former vice president, Al Gore, came out of the closet two years ago and endorsed such a plan, and Hillary has been known to declare privately that she would like to impose such a system on us. "Single payer" systems are the rage of the entire "peace and justice" crowd, along with large numbers of others in the political classes. Thus, I realize it would take some real political courage on your part to stand up against it and be an influence for the good.

Proponents of such a plan declare that if health care services were "free" (that is, no fees for services are charged), then anyone who needs health care can receive it without having to worry about the ability to pay. At least, that is the pretty picture that politicians who champion this system like to paint for us. Reality ? and especially economic reality ? has a way of reminding us of a few truths, however.

It is obvious that medical care fits the definition of a "scarce good," and since that is the case, people cannot have unlimited amounts of it at a "zero price." Furthermore, by making medical care essentially a government service, those who manage and administer such care will not have a mechanism by which to engage in economic calculation. While these may seem like esoteric terms to you, in reality, they are matters of life and death.

When I saw my cardiologist a couple of weeks ago, we discussed the "Canadian system," and he pointed out just how inhumane this supposedly "humane" and "free" system really is. Remember my timeline: I went to the emergency room on Friday afternoon (July 9), was checked in for the weekend, and was taken to the cath lab early the following Monday (July 12).

Immediately after the procedure in which they put dye in my veins to find the blockages, the doctor said to prepare for angioplasty, and in less than an hour, I was being wheeled back to my room. (I am forever grateful I heard the doctor say "angioplasty" instead of "open heart surgery," but I am even more grateful to be alive.)

A friend of his living in Canada, according to my doctor, suffered a heart attack and went to the hospital. Realizing the trauma, the medical authorities scheduled him for a test ? for nine months later. In the interim, he was forced to take blood thinners and other medications, but had to live with the knowledge that he was a step away from another attack ? and this one almost surely would be fatal.

After his tests confirmed arterial blockages, he was sent home to wait ? and suffer. Despite his having actually had a heart attack, three years passed before he had open-heart surgery to correct his problem. In the interim, he got by as best he could, but was hardly functioning normally.

The story I have related is true ? and is quite typical of this system. Yes, there are conscientious doctors and nurses in Canada, and it is not their fault that the lines for care are as long as they are. It is the nature of socialism, which not only forces people to bear costs of the lack of medical care through missed work, worse health, and ? all too often ? death, but also dehumanizes the care in the process.

There is something quite dehumanizing about forcing a person to wait three years for surgery following a heart attack. Canadians who have suffered or who have had family members suffer under this kind of malpractice have emailed me with their own tales, and the newspapers in Canada are full of horror stories that even the True Believers of the system cannot ignore.

However, I also receive emails from angry (and often abusive) Canadians who declare one of the following: (1) the system is "free" and does not discriminate between rich and poor, or (2) the forced egalitarianism of the system is morally superior to what we have in the United States, so the medical system ? as rife with malpractice as it might be ? is actually a stairway to a spiritually higher plane of life.

The only problem here is that the system is neither free nor egalitarian. As I pointed out before, a scarce good that is in demand cannot be provided for free, unless one believes that no one in that system, from the lowest orderly to the highest-level surgeon, not to mention everyone who is involved in any way with a medical operation works for no compensation whatsoever. That clearly is not the case, so we should dispense with the fiction that Canada has a "free" medical system. Canadians pay dearly with some of the highest tax rates in the Western Hemisphere.

Second, a medical system that is designed by the political classes is one designed with the interests of the political classes in mind. It is not designed for those who actually must use the system, as no one suffering from a heart attack would impose a three-year wait upon himself for a necessary operation.

No, we can be assured that those who are wealthy enough will opt out for care in another country (like the USA), and that those who are deemed politically important will be taken to the head of the line. From presidents protected by goons from the Secret Service to the local member of the county council, Americans have been propagandized into believing that elected politicians and political appointees, not to mention most government employees, are the most important people in the country. Important people, of course, must be given instant care; everyone else can wait.

Thus, Mr. Clinton, we know that under the system that your wife wants to impose, you never would have been in danger of waiting for surgery. Instead, others would have to bear the costs. Now, you have claimed in all of your recent speeches to be a person who stands for basic fairness in society; perhaps you can see the unfairness of forcing people to wait in line for health care services when other methods exist to give them timely service.

As a loyal American, I hope that your surgery is successful. Having faced the Grim Reaper myself, I do sympathize with people who are vulnerable to heart attacks and heart disease.

But I also would be remiss if I were to fail to urge you not to use this occasion to call for even more government control of medical care. As a former President of the United States, I am not surprised to see doctors act quickly to deal with your health problems. However, I am a nobody compared to you, yet the care I received was as timely and as high-quality as the care you have been receiving. That is because at least some vestiges of a free market system still exist in our system, and we need even more free enterprise there, not less.

I wish you the best as you go under the surgeon?s care this week. But there is even more at stake here than your good health, and I hope you can be persuaded to do the right thing.

Sincerely,
William L. Anderson


--------------------
?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: The Irony of Clinton's Medical Situation [Re: Ancalagon]
    #3114475 - 09/09/04 05:49 PM (12 years, 2 months ago)

Now that's irony.

As an expatriate Canadian (over sixteen years now) I know only too well the shortfalls of the Canadian socialized medicine scheme. I've posted in this forum several times about it.

Bush's enormous expansion of Medicare will come back to bite America on the ass. It's just a matter of time before socialized medicine will be a fact in the US. It's not an "if" but a "when".

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* U.S. Surgery costs found to be double than that of Canada. BCBudJohn 1,788 19 07/16/05 11:28 AM
by zappaisgod
* Compared to George Bush, Clinton was Conservative
( 1 2 all )
Skeptikos 3,385 31 01/20/06 02:11 AM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03
* Bill Clinton to run U.N.? ekomstop 842 11 10/22/04 08:32 PM
by Divided_Sky
* Dr. Bush's Botched Surgery SquattingMarmot 329 0 10/15/03 02:09 AM
by SquattingMarmot
* Hillary Clinton WILL destroy America
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
dedjam 6,126 103 06/09/07 03:08 AM
by FrenchSocialist
* Presidential candidates stances on medical marijuana?
( 1 2 all )
dr_gonz 2,350 30 11/28/07 09:29 PM
by zappaisgod
* Clinton Staffers Held Hostage, Two Relesased johnm214 577 6 12/01/07 09:22 AM
by fireworks_god
* where is Hillary Clinton? lonestar2004 650 7 10/19/04 04:01 PM
by Evolving

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
522 topic views. 1 members, 1 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Avalon Magic Plants
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.091 seconds spending 0.002 seconds on 14 queries.