Considering our government's history of inefficacy, corruption and downright poor decision-making, I am truly baffled by the idea that any increase in government involvement in the health care system would solve our problems.
Our health care system is not perfect. It is unfortunate that some people are denied treatment, it is unsettling how much some treatments and medicines cost, and there are certainly some aspects that could be changed.
More government involvement in health care would mean more problems. Consider a recent example at Belmont Abbey College.
Belmont Abbey College, or BAC, is a Benedictine-run, Catholic liberal arts school located in North Carolina. It offers 19 majors and almost as many varsity sports to just less than 1,500 students. It has led a generally quiet existence in the more than 130 years since its opening.
Recently, however, the college and its president have been making some waves. In 2007 BAC's administration realized that the employee health plan included coverage for contraception, sterilization and abortion. All these things are considered intrinsic moral evils by the Catholic Church.
The president of the BAC, Dr. William K. Thierfelder, desiring to keep his institution in line with the teachings of the Church, took action immediately after this information was brought to his attention. He asked the health insurance provider (who complied) to remove this coverage from the plan and notified his staff of the change.
Although this might seem to some a minor change, several employees were very upset by this action, and eight filed formal complaints with the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging discrimination by the college.
A few days ago, the EEOC laid down its findings in the case. It accused BAC of discriminating against women by removing the provision for contraception from its insurance coverage, and it is likely that the Commission will file a lawsuit against Belmont Abbey College.
BAC has stood firm in the midst of this controversy, and Dr. Thiefelder recently told the Washington Times that "I hope it would never get this far, but if it came down to it, we would close the college before we ever provided that (coverage)."
I for one admire the integrity and courage demonstrated by Dr. Thiefelder and BAC, but I also think that this case highlights at least one major problem with the recently proposed health care "reform" plans.
Regardless of where you stand on contraception, sterilization and abortion, an organization should not be required to offer coverage on them for any reason, especially if it conflicts with its consistent and expressly stated religious views. But if you want coverage for these things, you ought to be able to get it from someone else.
If the system worked like it ought to, we wouldn't even have had this problem. Instead of filing complaints with federal agencies, the employees who didn't like the move made by the college could have simply dropped the coverage altogether and gotten their health insurance elsewhere. That's how a free market works.
The problem, and the reason that this didn't happen, has to do with discrimination, not by BAC against women, but by the U.S Government against private health care.
Although I personally don't approve of contraception, sterilization or abortion, I think that if a person wants to pay for a health care plan that covers these things, he or she ought to be able to. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the eight employees of BAC would be able to find a suitable alternative to the plan offered by their employer.
Our current health insurance system favors employer based insurance packages. The government has essentially created a monopoly for employee-based health insurance by giving tax and liability advantages to corporate insurers and by making constricting laws against selling insurance across state lines. These regulations make individually purchased health insurance very difficult to get and much more expensive (for both the insurer and the insured). This is part of the reason that so many unemployed people lack health insurance.
Thus, the solution to at least some of our healthcare system problems, as well as the problem at BAC, is for the government to just get out and let the free market take its course.
There are problems with our health care system that need to be fixed, but almost none of them are addressed by the recent health care bills in the Senate and House.
A public option or other federally funded option (which is almost the same thing) would provide an option for private citizens, but how would we determine what it would cover? I don't want my tax dollars to pay for your contraception. The current legislation doesn't solve the problems presented by the BAC situation or many others that are even more serious.
Nobody is talking about decreasing government intervention, for example, or tort reform, or about reexamining the expensive way drug companies are required to test new drugs.
No one seems to realize that it is the government's relationship with and involvement in the health care system that is the source of many of the problems we're experiencing.
As I said before, I admire Belmont Abbey College's conduct in the midst of this controversy, but even more I wish that this had never been an issue. Maybe someone in Washington will connect the dots and make some changes so that this sort of thing won't be in the future.
Luke Fischer is a senior secondary-education major. Reach him at lukefischer@dailynebraskan.com.
is a member of the 
2 comments