The Disagreement: What does the Constitution, Capitalism, and the Majority have to Say?
The Disagreement with Universal Healthcare
So now that we have the backstory covered, let us move on to the foundational reasons as to why their is a disagreement in America as to whether or not health care should be a right. There are three key parts to this series of the debate. The constitutional disagreement, the capitalistic disagreement, and the majority of the populace disagreement.
The Disagreement: Universal Healthcare is Unsupported by the US Constitution.
The disagreement directly stems from the lack of back-up that it has from our nation's founding document. [10] The Constitution of the United States absolutely does not provide support for a right to health care. As stated in the Preamble of the constitution, the purpose of the US government is to “promote the general welfare,” nowhere does it say to provide it. In fact, The Bill of Rights list a number of personal freedoms that the government cannot infringe upon. Nowhere does it mention material goods or services that the government must provide. [11] Former Congressman Ron Paul once stated it so eloquently, “ you have a right to your life and you have a right to your liberty and you have a right to keep what you earn in a free country… You do not have the right to services or things.” [12]
In fact, 28 states had filed a joint or individual lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act (ACA). A press release stated that the Attorney General for several of those states had indicated why the felt as though the ACA was a violation of state sovereignty. Their claim challenged the federal government under a threat penalty, claiming that it was an unfair, financial burden on said state governments.[13] The legislators in the 29 states have introduced measures to amend their constitutions so that they nullify portions of the ACA. The lawsuit states as follows:
“Regulation of non-economic activity under the Commerce Clause is possible only through the Necessary and Proper Clause. The Necessary and Proper Clause confers supplemental authority only when the means adopted to accomplish an enumerated power are 'appropriate', are 'plainly adapted to that end', and are 'consistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution.' Requiring citizen-to-citizen subsidy or redistribution is contrary to the foundational assumptions of the constitutional compact.”
The Disagreement: Capitalism’s POV
The point of time where road of capitalism merges with the road of socialism, America hates it, and some Americans don’t. What I am trying to say is when you begin to implement a right to healthcare you are leading the United States directly towards socialism, which absolutely doesn’t work in the long run. Socialism, by definition, assumes government control over the distribution of goods and services. [14] When under a system that is referred to as “ a single-payer system”, that is a term used to describe a type of financing system. It refers to one entity acting as administrator, or “payer”, the government can control the entire distribution of health care services. “ In the case of healthcare, a single-payer system would be setup such that one entity—a government run organization—would collect all healthcare fees, and pay out all healthcare costs.” [15]
Ronald Reagan once said, “one of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine,” usually, once socialized medicine is inducted,”behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom.”[16] Overall, The free market is and should be the sole determiner of the availability and cost of all health care services, never should it be the federal Government. [17]
The Disagreement: The Majority
The majority of Americans do not believe that there should be a right to healthcare. According to a poll that was taken by Gallup, 56% of all americans do not believe that it is “ the responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have healthcare.” In 2012, Gallup found that over 54% of Americans opposed the idea of federally-financed universal health coverage.[18] These are very large numbers. You start to ask yourself, why do people not want it? Well I can answer that for you. With each new government promise, there will be new taxes. How else do you expect to get things for free? Someone has to pay! It is common logic that nothing is for free, there is absolutely no free lunch, and there never will be. You can expect the majority to be weary, or flat out reject such a concept. Economics 101 will tell you that goods and services are always cheaper, and that money is always more efficient when in the private sector. .That logically follows that money given to the public sector (the government), will never be used to it’s full potential, therefore the people will suffer the consequence of their money being taken at higher rates, and used at a lower efficiency.
People should pay for their own healthcare, not have it given to them by the government. When you are under a single-payer system, the right to health care typically is paid by those who are making enough money to pay for it. So, if you understand what universal healthcare is, you will realize that those who don’t pay will still get healthcare. Now you ask, “how is that possible?” It is possible because those who are employed will just be taxed more. Also, those who can’t really afford the payment that the “rich” will pay, will just pay a lower amount than what is required and they will get the exact same benefits at the wealthy's expense. And most of the time it isn’t the wealthy that pays the extra amount to balance it out. Majority shows that it is the middle class who offsets the cost, thus destroying the middle class, and creating a large gap between the rich and poor. In the US you have a right to purchase healthcare. That should never turn into you have the right to receive healthcare for free.
