The Public Option

Hi!

As the debate over universal health care rages, it amazes me to hear people who so vehemently oppose the public option for health care are often the same folks who are happy to send their kids to public school. Since kids spend a LOT more time in school then they do at the doctor, and there is a LOT more variability in the quality of schools than the quality of doctors, it seems VERY hypocritical.

Full disclosure: My kids are homeschooled. However, my wife and I consider this a choice that we're glad we have the option to make. We considered the public option, and chose another. We believe that public schools SHOULD be available to everyone and don't mind paying taxes to support schools that don't benefit our kids, because they do benefit society. Of course, I'd understand opposition to the public health care option if schools are any indication of what we'd expect. If public health care were run like public schools...

1) Kids would see a doctor in groups of 30 and the sickest kid would define the treatment all 30 would receive. The following year, kids would be grouped differently and see a different set of doctors.

2) In order to improve health, the government would (with the help of for-profit hospitals who administer the tests) define what "healthy" means based on what some very simple tests can measure.

3) Kids who are not healthy are labeld "special" and encouraged to drop out of the system by administrators and doctors who are paid based on the "health scores" their kids receive.

Any others? Clearly, this would be an insane way to run a health care system for our kids, but it is almost EXACTLY how our public school system is run. Fortunately, no one (I repeat, NO ONE) is suggesting this kind of system for universal health care. Rather than fight what is a perfectly reasonable (though, admittedly, not perfect) universal health care proposal, why not oppose what is clearly a public school system that is disfunctional?

Take care!
Matt