A 1-In-100 Blogger: Healthcare: Sarah Palin vs. Mitt Romney

Monday, March 8, 2010

Healthcare: Sarah Palin vs. Mitt Romney

On the issues of health care, it makes sense to compare the ideas of Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney. After all, even though Romney is quite the business-savvy man, as the former Republican governor of Massachusetts he created the nation's first State-run universal health care program. In one corner, we have Sarah Palin's view on health care; in the other corner, we have Mitt Romney's view on health care.



Mitt Romney on 'FNS' discussed the similarities and differences of a Massachusetts 'entitlement' health care program versus a nationalized health care system. Romney played a role in passing universal health care in MA, from which he defended, "Even with these added costs and policy choices by the legislature and the new governor, the plan is working." But let's look at the MA health care record:
* Premiums are the highest in the nation
* Per capita spending is 27% higher than the national average
* Fiscal 2010 costs are $47M over budget

In Romney's defense, he has said this health care reform "did not include a single tax increase." However, Mitt Romney also made the statement, "what we have is a plan which is paid for half by the state and half by the federal government." Otherwise, his plan sure sounds a lot like ObamaCare.

Personally, I'm not so sure I like the word entitlement when it comes to government handouts because such a freebie always comes with more restrictions on personal liberty and increases in government debt. But I do like Romney's view that the individual states are the ones who should be solving their own health care issues. The federal government has no place trying to reform America's entire health care system, because it is a state issue. Nationalizing health care is not the solution, which is something Romney agrees on.

The first time Sarah Palin publicly spoke about Obama's health care agenda was on the healthcare reform death panels. The reason she said 'death panels' was due to the end-of-life provision in Barack Obama's version of the healthcare reform bill, which was under consideration in the House, and would pay physicians to "advise patients about end-of-life care and rate physician quality of care based on the creation of and adherence to orders for end-of-life care." After first accusing her of lying, Obama finally retracted his statement and admitted, "It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills..." Good thing Sarah Palin caught it then, right Obama?

In my political opinion, Sarah Palin leads the debate with a common sense approach to the health care issue.

Common sense tells us that the government's attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats' proposals "will provide more stability and security to every American."

Sarah Palin also notes on her Facebook page how human rights and personal liberty must always remain at the center of any health care discussion.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion. [...] Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, 'Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.' Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.

No comments: