Does the healthcare debate teach us about economics?

Or is this more of a civics lesson?

I start by reminding myself that this is not a political blog - and yet, I have to admit to varying degrees of upset and frustration as I see the current Congress and Administration move us rapidly down a disastrous road.

To concentrate on one aspect of this disturbing push, the "debate" over the health care system provides a lesson that we do not have to glean from history; we can watch it and experience it in person.

Economics: one side claims they will reduce health care costs, cover more people, and improve services; the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office claims the plan will actually cost over a trillion dollars; the opposing side claims the cost will be much higher than that, or else rationing will be necessary. Can we know the truth?

The history of our own country could be a guide. Ask your student to research the debate over Medicare and Medicaid. Both were touted as cures to the problems of our health care system. Compare the cost estimates generated by their proponents in Congress, the estimates of cost generated by the CBO, and the actual costs. For a more advanced economic comparison, consider that Medicare and Medicaid underpay hospitals and doctors, who then shift those costs onto patients covered by private insurance. What does Medicare/Medicaid really cost?

Now jump forward, and apply the factor by which Medicare/Medicaid costs were underestimated to the current cost estimates for the plans being proposed by Congress and the administration. How much will this experiment cost? And, considering there will be no private insurers to shift the costs onto, how much revenue will have to be raised (through increased taxes) to pay for this new system?

Wait a minute (I hear you say) - the President and Congress have said that private insurance will still be allowed. But.. let us shift to a civics lesson now. How do politicians assure you that you will have what you want, while they take it away from you? This editorial in Investors Business Daily (highly recommended, by the way, for any students who are of an age to begin investing [and yes, I admit that my girls watch the financial channel with me, and have more than a nodding acquaintance with the stock markets even though they are not yet out of grade school]) is an excellent lesson in the duplicitous nature of the political beast.

More civics: what happens to a government when there are no longer checks and balances? When the Congress and the Executive are in lock step with each other, and the party in control has a majority of sufficient size to block dissension, where are the checks and balances?

The Judicial is supposed to be the final check, but is the nationalization of a portion of our economy unconstitutional? If there is a chance for court intervention, would any particular citizen have standing before the court? OK, this may be getting into questions most homeschoolers will not be able to answer, because I think scholars will be divided on the answer. It makes for an interesting thought experiment, though.

Ah, but the final check and balance comes from the so-called Fourth Estate. No, not the conventional press, as few in the legacy media seem to have an interest in providing detail in this debate. Yes, they publish the press releases and cover the media events, and perhaps add a little editorial comment disguised as news, but have they provided us with a look at how these proposals work in other countries? Surprisingly, no! However, there are those enterprising folks in the so-called New Media who have. Take this young fellow, who was raised in Canada and has friends in Canada. He has given us a patient's-eye view of the Canadian system:



An entertaining look. For a more general look, taken from various British publications, try this list of links. Harry Erwin's "Letters from England" cover a variety of topics, but he often has reports on the British health care system. This is from a Google search of Jerry Pournelle's blog - another site with some tremendous information on it.

So, we have a lesson for our students. A lesson in looking beyond the speeches, diving deeper than the press releases, ferreting out the lies and distortions. A lesson in using the resources that are now easily available through the Web, and a lesson in critical thinking. And the lesson for the home school teacher? Perhaps for most a reinforcement than a lesson; we can provide our children with mental tools, with critical skills, that the public schools (and many private schools) will not encourage or develop in their students - much to the detriment of our society and our culture.