What do the House, Senate, State, and local government officials all have in common? A trick question but if you look closely is that most of them, Republican or Democrat, never have a straight answer on what to do about the US healthcare system. Many argue that capitalism will weed out bad ideas and that people will decide. The system, however, has not sorted itself out and health care has never been more problematic than it has been today.

Free Market

Running for the US presidency boasts issues that many need to be straight forward about. One of Trump’s biggest draw factors was his distaste for Obamacare and his will to tear it down.

“Replacing Obamacare will force insurance companies to compete for their customers with lower costs and higher-quality service.” According to whitehouse.gov. This comment from the white house administration is for free market insurance. Though this is the case the full repeal trump wanted has yet to come to fruition.

His first attempt came in  2017 when a bill proposed fell short within the senate. Much infighting, even among Republicans, were in favor of some of the options Obamacare offered. Compromises have been made by taking out the individual mandate, adding work requirements to states that want to, and cost-sharing reductions.

It also presents many options for different plans and services that you want to pay for. If you are a climber or dancer you can pay for more coverage while someone who rarely leaves the home can go with basic preventative care. Lastly, no one has to wait for the most serious surgeries other than operations that require a heart or kidney.

The issues that spring from this is that people with more money or better jobs have better coverage, but the question of whether healthcare is an inherent right or not, which most constitutionalists believe it is not. It has also created a system where life-saving medications like insulin or EpiPens were being sold for exorbitant prices because of monopolization. It also lets hospitals set their own prices for the same things. Generic Advil can cost $50 at one hospital and $20 at another and that is still overpaying at both. Without regulation, costs can run rampant on an inelastic supply and demand curve with uniformed consumers.

Social Healthcare

Others think that everyone should be covered under a social plan, like Obamacare. Trying to meet both standards and also having available healthcare on the free market as well as it being mandatory. With a pandemic and many losing their insurance through their work, this has turned many to a now overtaxed and broken system that they now can’t afford, because of the cost and without because of heavier tax burdens.

Regular checkups, physicals, and other everyday mishaps are covered or cost little to nothing. You would also still have the option to visit private health care professionals at lowered costs for more serious situations.

The problem that comes with this is that if you rely on this service alone you may wait months for a life-saving operation. Many still turn to private insurance and providers paying more on top of what they already cover in taxes. The moral being you are still paying more for better coverage, you are just also now paying for other services you may not need as well. And, the worst part is the dollar amounts increased through the implementation of Obamacare by an average of 22% with some states receiving an increase of at least 56%.  The biggest profit has been taken by the insurance companies… there has got to be a better way.  Obama couldn’t do it maybe someone else can.

Universal Health Care

Lastly, some think we should take out privatized healthcare altogether and everyone gets the same access to all health providers. Using taxpayer money to have universal coverage covering all or most medical expenses.

“The laws determine what type of care must be provided, to whom the care must be provided, and the basis for determining coverage,” According to HealthPAC. This means that the government will regulate coverage, pricing, and services. Every hospital will have the same price for their service. Medical professionals will answer to one government institute instead of 20 insurance companies.

The drawbacks are the tax prices and that everyone will be covered regardless of if they want to be or not, and the availability of healthcare will significantly decrease. Everyone will be paying the same amount for the same services and the system will suffer some of the same issues as socialistic health care. A life-saving operation may be pushed out for months, leaving patients to suffer or die waiting for this.

The Best Choice

Just like many laws or decisions, none of these options are perfect. Our country has thrived off of the ability to create and let the people decide. Large insurance companies have controlled patient’s healthcare options through pre-existing condition exclusions and not including basic insurance benefits such as preventive care. Without some government intervention and also providing more opportunity for fair competitive capitalism, it leaves hospital care, availability, and pricing in disarray. Paying thousands for something people need to take every day is wrong, paying $50 for Advil without insurance at a hospital is wrong.  Where can we meet in the middle?

In the end, there is no easy solution, and whether or not we want to accept it, the government does need to rein in some of the problems with this system by stimulating the healthcare system, and allowing capitalism to do more of its magic by increasing competition and finding a way to lower subsidies without reducing care for those that need it.  I know there is a solution, we just need to create it.  This further can be done by reducing prices for everyone and helping those that cannot afford insurance get coverage, but also not penalizing them for not having it. Not everyone needs to have insurance if they don’t want to and should definitely not get penalized for it.  Is the best a free market plus insurance company based restrictions?

The Electoral College has been one of the most influential, and some may even argue only factor in electing the president of the United States. It is a controversial subject given that, in some ways, it lessens your vote as a citizen.

How It Works

There are two types of votes that can help the president. One is the popular and the other the electoral. To briefly describe how the Electoral works is that there are a total of 270 votes a candidate needs out of the 538 available. The number of votes depends on population size for states. The states with the most electoral votes since the start of 2020 are California (55), Florida (29), Texas (38) and New York (29) according to 270towin.com.

This means states like Idaho (4), Montana (3), Vermont (3) and New Hampshire (4) have less voting power on a state level. Since some of the safe states have the largest vote like California, which is democrat, it makes smaller states more important since they can give that extra edge to win.

Criticism

Many argue that the electoral college lessens the votes of its citizens due to presidents solely focusing on larger swing states like Texas.

There is also the fact that even if a president wins the popular vote like Al Gore in 2000, George Bush Jr. won because of the electoral vote. The people voted for Al Gore, and if it came down to just the popular vote he would have won. Mayors, city officials and even state senators are put in office by sole popular vote. Why should the president be any different?

There are also arguments that less turnout occurs in states that are safe states due to the college always voting for one party and not the person running. 

“If you were to cram everyone into California and just leave one person in each state then California, she decides [the president].” According to CGP Grey, a Youtube political channel. If a president were to win just 11 of the biggest states they are more than likely becoming president. This leaves smaller states without power. 

There is also the biggest concern that these electors aren’t even chosen by the people to vote on that state’s behalf. The qualification as stated in the constitution in “Article II, section 1, clause 2 provides that no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

Most of the time no one really knows who is in the electoral college except for those in major political positions, which makes buying the electoral vote very possible. The national archive also goes on to say that you aren’t even voting for the president when you go to vote.

“When you vote for a Presidential candidate, you aren’t actually voting for President. You are telling your State which candidate you want your State to vote for at the meeting of electors.” This means that even if you vote for republican the entire party could have been bought off to vote for democrats since they are not obligated to vote for their state’s choice of candidate.

Support

When it comes down to it most people focus on the sole interest of themselves, not the collective. Most also won’t do in-depth research into the person they are voting for.

“A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.” Said Alexander Hamilton from the federalist papers. The electoral college, among many reasons, was created to help easy the burden of some research for citizens. The people in the college are supposedly well versed in the political ideals of the candidates and will have all the information needed to make the best choice for the country.

There is also the fact that it helps minority groups and smaller states. Though the more populated states get the most votes, some of the biggest are safe or swing states for both parties. This makes it so that every state counts in getting that edge to 270. 

Opinion

When it comes down to it, most people aren’t going to take the time to fully flesh out who is in office. As an individual voter, you are only really concerned with what the president is saying is good for you. 

There is not a perfect system, but there is a better one out there. It is up to the citizens to vote for who they want. No one should have more power in voting then the other. With the technology available to us now it has never been easier to collect individual ballots. 

This system was created hundreds of years ago, and as such should change with the times. Many people didn’t have access to information like we do now. Reading was for the elite where now more than 99% of the US population is literate. If you are voting for someone who will represent the entire US, then doing research should be as important as that position.

With roughly 69,000 reported cases for corona-virus in Italy, it is currently second of the top three being ravaged by this virus. Lack of preparation, elderly population and an unprepared healthcare system are some of the many reasons that this has burned through the proud country. Other countries are using Italy as an example for just how deadly this virus can be if not prepared.

This is not the first or even most serious outbreak in history, but this is showing just how ill prepared many modern countries are to pandemic level issues. How the US fits into this is that currently we are third worst in the world with over 51,000 confirmed cases. Unlike many countries like South Korea, we didn’t start taking necessary precautions when this virus was just a nuisance.

Lack of preparation

The United States enacted an early travel ban to and from China during the start of the virus. This was a good first start but didn’t account that traveling the world is incredibly easy. In an article by the Washington post they go over how negligent government officials were about the start of this epidemic.

The problem is that when countries started “evacuating” their citizens they didn’t take the precautions of screening before flying. Healthy people were put on plains with those who were potentially infected.

Italy didn’t officially lock down until March 9th, 2020. Up until that point people were still roaming to and fro and trying to get out of the epicenter. Not unlike what America is doing now with some parts of California and New York. People can still travel from state to state without any repercussions according to LA times.

The other is the ignoring of the self quarantining and less than 10 people etiquette in place. Mass hysteria ensued once Italy went on lock down. Everything from toilet paper to tomato sauce were gone in a day as hundreds to thousands rushed to their local and chain grocery stores.

Lack of Health Care

Italy in recent history has never had an outbreak worse than the Flu. The most recent and deadly they had to deal with is the Spanish flu in 1918 which killed 20 million worldwide. Every country felt the deadly effect of this, but it was over 100 years ago.

Though they were hit the hardest they have probably been the most upfront and hardest hitting at dealing with corona-virus. Taking a page from Korea they are testing anyone and everyone that may have been in contact with corona positive people. They are also putting this information out publicly, mortality rate and all.

America has had to deal with many different outbreaks in recent history. Measles, Polio and even HIV have wreaked havoc, and yet the treatment of these has never been as severe as how we are treating corona virus now.

We are nowhere near as many tests as we should be. Having 100 per million according to the CDC

Our system and mentality are just not prepared for this type of crisis. The Trump administration back in 2018 enacted a rescission of funds cut funding by $15.4 billion to health and services (among many others). This included the CDC and other response units that could help in times of pandemic.

Spread of Information

One of the most defining things about current history is our ability to communicate almost instantaneously. Computers and smartphones with social media are being used to spread information and misinformation like wildfire.

If you were to try and google recovery rates, you would still get death tolls anyway. There is also a lack of information on what after effects the corona-virus does to those who actually recover.