A local reader of the Northside Sun recently submitted an article titled “USA Long Overdue for Universal Health Care,” which is a favorite liberal euphemism for socialized medicine.
Many years ago (when I was younger, and idealistic, and had no knowledge of the real world), I too had a favorable opinion toward socialized medicine. However, I will give you three examples from my own life which proved to me why socialized medicine should NEVER be adopted in this country.
CASE #1: My wife and I took a trip to New York City in 2000 to celebrate our anniversary. While waiting in line at a nice restaurant, we struck up a conversation with another couple who was in line ahead of us. They had very strong British accents, so I asked, “what brings you to America? Are you on holiday?” But the gentleman’s answer shocked me: He said, “No, I came to NYC for open heart surgery.” I was puzzled, so I asked, “Why would you come to NYC for surgery? Don’t you have socialized medicine in England, where the surgery would be free?” He answered: “Yes, we have socialized medicine in England, and that’s why the waiting line is so long. I would have had to wait more than six months before my surgery date. Since I had a 99 percent blockage in the ‘widow maker’ artery, my doctor told me that I would be dead long before my surgery date came up. And under England’s socialized medicine program, you are not allowed to ‘cut ahead in line’ for any reason. Since I am blessed with the financial means to pay for my surgery, we came to NYC, and I had my surgery here. I am now feeling well enough to head back to England, so we will be leaving this weekend.” Does this sound like a system that benefits people? If this gentleman were not able to come to the USA, he would have died while he waited for his surgery date in England.
CASE #2: On Glenn Beck’s radio show, he has featured several cases highlighting the failures of the Canadian socialized medicine system. The most famous case was for Jolene Van Alstine in December 2025. This lady has been suffering from a debilitating glandular condition that causes her extreme pain, which causes her to experience constant nausea and vomiting. There are only a couple of specialists in Canada trained to treat this condition, and they were either too busy to accept any new patients, or could only offer her appointment many months down the road. But the “compassionate” Canadian government did offer her a solution. They offered her an immediate appointment to kill herself in their MAID (Medical Assistance in Dying) program, which is their government-funded euthanasia program. Although everyone knows that conservatives are heartless and cruel, Glenn Beck offered to pay for her to fly to Florida and receive treatment at the Mayo Clinic, where there is a specialist who is trained in her condition. Luckily, the Canadian government was publicly embarrassed when Beck highlighted this lady’s case, so they forced a Canadian doctor to see her, and she is currently being treated through a specialist in Toronto, in consultation with the doctor in Florida. But if Beck had not intervened on her behalf, this lady was suffering so badly that she was getting ready to schedule her doctor-assisted suicide. Again, does this sound like a system that cares about people’s suffering?
CASE #3: My wife was recently diagnosed with breast cancer, for the third time (since we have the best healthcare system in the world here in the USA, she has already survived breast cancer twice). Since this is a third appearance of a tumor, her doctor ordered a PET scan, to make sure the cancer has not spread. But our insurance company denied the test, in favor of a cheaper, less comprehensive test. Her doctor strongly recommended the PET scan, and we needed to do it quickly due to aggressive nature of her cancer, so we didn’t have time to waste going through the “appeal process” with the insurance company; therefore, I offered to pay for the test myself, and I (and my attorney) planned on negotiating with the insurance company to reimburse me later. But I was told that I was not allowed to pay for the procedure myself! I called every facility in central Mississippi, and all of them gave me the same answer: if you have insurance, then you are not allowed to pay for it yourself! If I didn’t have insurance, then they would be allowed to accept a private payment; but if you have insurance, you are not allowed to pay for the test yourself. I asked every facility that I called: “Why am I not allowed to pay for it myself?” None of them could give me a definitive answer, so don’t know if this is one of the many “poison pill” rules that are hidden within the Obamacare program, or if it is a Mississippi Department of Insurance rule, or what? All I know is that I felt a lot like the man from England: Even if I can pay for my own healthcare, the rules set forth by the government will NOT ALLOW ME to access the care and procedures that my doctor says that we need. So again, I ask: Does this sound like a system that cares about people? To me, it sounds like a system that really doesn’t care if you live or die (in fact, as exemplified in the Canadian case, they would prefer if you die, which will save the government a lot of money).
I would not be opposed to our government expanding Medicare to include people who are disabled, or are too sick to acquire health insurance coverage in the free market, such as the way automobile insurance works.
But as exemplified in the cases highlighted above, I vehemently oppose any form of socialized medicine. I favor a pure free-market system that allows people to MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS, without having to “fight the government” to get the care that you need.
As President Reagan famously said: “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government IS the problem!”
John Dorsa is a Northsider.
