The Houston Objectivism Society is an organization dedicated to spreading the ideas of Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism in the Houston area.

One editorial and another article by Paul Krugman appeared in Friday’s paper lamenting the fact that the federal and state government don’t provide health care to everyone who needs it.  Both of these pieces assume that if citizens need something, in this case health insurance, that the government must provide it by way of taking money (i.e. taxes) from responsible, hardworking people and giving it to others who are less well off or irresponsible or just plain lazy.  Just because someone needs something, even if that something is as important as medical care, other people (i.e. taxpayers) shouldn’t be forced to provide for those needs.  People also need clothing and shoes, so does that mean the government should set up a national shoe and clothing program and take a significant portion of everyone’s paycheck in order to fund it?  Obviously not.  In our constitutional republic, one that should recognize and respect individual rights, individuals—doctors and patients—should be left free to make their own medical decisions and to agree upon a price to be paid by that individual patient.  To have a right to something (such as a right to life or property) means that a person should be given the freedom to seek out his or her values without interference from other people or the government.  For example, when our Founding Fathers wrote that Americans have a right to life, they did not mean that others had to provide them with the means to sustain that life.

People who are promoting socialized medicine keep whining that the current system is broke.  Did they ever stop to ask why?  The government “broke” the system in the first place.  It started back in the 1930s with special deals to some insurance companies; then the problems began escalating after the passage of Medicaid and Medicare in the 1960s.  Now some people want the government to finish the job and make our entire health care system one big Medicaid program.  We’ve recently seen how well the government has managed half the mortgage market.  How could anyone want them to do the same thing to health care?  Krugman also points out that every other “advanced nation” provides national health care and disparages the United States because we don’t.  Just because these other nations choose to violate the rights of their citizens doesn’t mean the U.S. should follow suit.  Americans should be proud of the fact that we have the most advanced medical facilities, medicines, and medical technology available in the world today because we still have the remnants of a free market system.  But we won’t for long if concerned citizens don’t speak out against a government takeover of health care.

Besides myself, three other members showed up to the healthcare meeting on Friday, July 18th (which actually was a Congressional Hearing).  I had planned my son’s feedings around the meeting, which was to be from 1:30-3:30.  Those @#$% politicians didn't show up until 3:00!  Up to that point, I had been amusing my son, but the minute John Conyers started speaking, he started crying.  I was tempted to just stay there and annoy all those bleeding heart liberals (their own description) on stage, but I decided to step outside.  But I was there to hear the first words out of Conyers’ mouth: "This issue isn't about ideas, or theories, or philosophy, or idealism.  It's about providing healthcare."  No wonder my son started crying.  When I stepped back inside, I heard two doctors on stage telling sob stories about patients not receiving the care they need.  The last speaker was a former pres. of the AFL-CIO, who is now on the hospital district's board.  It’s probably not hard to imagine what he had to say.  It was getting close to 4:00, and I thought that they would finally take questions from the audience.  But, no.  They then introduced a second group of people to go up on stage to talk about the virtues of socialized medicine, no doubt.  By that time I had to leave because my son needed to be fed.  According to the members who stayed, the meeting continued for another hour with more of the same.  Then, around 5:00, Sheila Jackson Lee looked at her watch and said it was time to wrap things up and that they wouldn't have time to take questions or comments from the audience.  This after at the beginning of the meeting saying that she was eager to hear what members of the audience had to say.  Just one woman had a chance to run up to the microphone and ask a question about the pay for nursing teachers.

That was it.  The other three HOS members left in total disgust.  I'm glad I didn't waste another hour there.  Two of us did write letters to the editor, which unfortunately weren’t published (see below).  I also sent mine to both Lee and Conyers, as well as my rep. and senators.  The good news: I recently had a meeting with another HOS member, who is also an officer in the Rice Objectivism Club.  She mentioned the possibility of having a speaker from ARI, or perhaps a panel of speakers, come to Rice this fall to give a talk on the healthcare crisis.  With financial support from HOS members and ARI, I think we could make this happen.  I’ll keep you posted.

The Health Museum on Herman drive was the scene Friday afternoon of a contemptible sham “hearing” of John Conyers’ Judiciary committee.  It was run as a well staged play by that consummate director Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.  All of the actors (witnesses) began with fawning adoration for Ms. Lee and Mr. Conyers.  Most were groveling for more loot from the taxpayers’ pockets.  All of the actors (witnesses) simpered with praise for the proposed legislation HR 676 “The United States National Health Care Act.”  Not one single word was said in opposition by any of the actors.  Nor did the script allow time for questions from the audience.  The two hour performance once begun became a three hour play in two acts including scene changes (name cards) to get through the soliloquies of a second round of actors.

Now the substance:  There was a litany of suffering and pain stories to elicit sympathy followed by assertions of the right of the victims to not suffer it.  Many actors highlighted their personal sacrifices to upstage each other and elicit guilt.  None addressed the fundamental that National Health Care will take away my doctors’ and my absolute right to agree on a course of treatment and its price.  As Mr. Conyers said “This is not about ideas.  This is not about philosophy.”  Well you are right Mr. Conyers it is about the brute, thuggish force of government.  Doctors and individuals who honestly provide for their own health care are the intended victims.

In Houston on Friday, July 18th, a congressional hearing took place on a bill that would dramatically change health care as we know it in the United States for every single citizen, yet Saturday’s edition of the Houston Chronicle didn’t even mention the fact that this hearing took place.  Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, along with Congressman John Conyers, Jr., conducted a congressional hearing at The Health Museum on H.R. 676, “The United States National Health Insurance Act.”  This bill would “expand the already existing Medicare program to all U.S. residents. . .” (quoting from handout provided at the hearing).  This bill would require every citizen to apply for and receive a United States National Health Insurance Card.  It sets up a “program [that] would cover all medically necessary services, including primary care, inpatient care, outpatient care, emergency care, prescription drugs. . .mental health services, dentistry, eye care, chiropractic, and substance abuse treatment.”  Private insurers would not be allowed to “duplicate the benefits” of this program.  They would only be allowed to “provide coverage for cosmetic surgery and other non-medically necessary treatments.”  All for-profit hospitals and medical facilities would have to convert to private, non-profit institutions within fifteen years.  Basically, H.R. 676 is a bill that would nationalize all healthcare in the United States.

At first glance, some may think that providing health insurance for all Americans would improve the health of all concerned.  Instead, this plan would destroy the very health care system on which we all rely.  Our health care system is the best and most innovative in the world because doctors, hospitals, and other health related industries still have the freedom to operate their businesses for a profit.  This motivates them to provide the best care, best services, and best innovations.  Not only do they receive the rewards of their hard work in terms of gaining a profit, but the patient is also the beneficiary.

Why should every American be concerned for their very lives under H.R. 676?  This bill is a blatant violation of the individual rights of all citizens.  It violates the rights of doctors to determine the price of their services, to create “for profit” practices, to decide what insurance plans they will accept or what patients they will see and what treatments to offer.  It violates the rights of all health insurance company owners and workers because this bill will essentially put that entire industry out of business.  It also violates the rights of every citizen where it counts most:  their health.  U.S. citizens will no longer be able to choose their insurance providers or coverage plans.  We will no longer be able to consult with our doctors and choose the best treatments for us because the government will control what services will be provided.  We will no longer have a choice as to how much we want to pay for health insurance because all productive citizens and businesses will be forced to pay a new tax, which will no doubt increase over time.

What this bill will do is effectively ruin the healthcare system for everybody.  Would doctors be motivated to provide the best care possible if they aren’t allowed to own their own practices, to decide the insurance or patients they will accept, or to determine the cost of their services?  Will hospitals be motivated to provide the best care if they aren’t allowed to make a profit or to decide the cost of their services?  Would other medical technology companies and pharmaceutical companies be motivated to invest in research and development if they know that the use of their products will depend upon pleasing some government bureaucrat?  Think of healthcare as run like the post office, public schools, or the DMV office:  incompetent and ineffective service, long lines, unhappy workers, and little choice.  That’s exactly what politicians like Sheila Jackson Lee and John Conyers, Jr. want to do to our healthcare system.  These bad effects can already be seen with the ever expanding Medicare and Medicaid programs.  Just last week, the Houston Chronicle ran a story pointing out that a large number of doctors in Texas are refusing to take on more Medicaid or Medicare patients because of the red tape and low pay they have to endure.  What happens when our entire system becomes one big Medicare program?

At the hearing, time and again the politicians bemoaned the fact that our current healthcare system is “broken.”  Did they ever stop to ask why the system is broken?  Since the 1960s with the passage of Medicare and Medicaid, the government has been slowly encroaching upon the rights of doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, and patients.  They have continued to pass laws and regulations over the past four decades to try to “fix” the mess that they’ve created.  Now some politicians want to finish the job and make the takeover complete.

At the very least, the Houston Chronicle should have informed its readership that a congressional hearing took place over extremely controversial legislation that our very own Congresswoman is supporting.  This would give people a chance to consider this very important issue and decide for themselves the ramifications of “Medicare for All.”

• "Health Care is Not A Right" by Leonard Peikoff
• "Ted Kennedy vs. Universal Healthcare: A Double Irony" by Richard Parker, MD (ER doctor from Texas)
• "The Right Vision of Health Care" by Yaron Brook
• "FAQ on Free Market Health Insurance" by Paul Hsieh, MD
• "Moral Health Care Vs. 'Universal Health Care'" by Lin Zinser, JD and Hsieh, MD