Colorado HB 1273: “Our responsibility” that Coloradans get medical care?

April 8th, 2009 | by Brian Schwartz |

Defending the proposal for a politically-controlled monopolistic government insurance plan in Colorado, Rep. Daniel Kagan (D-Cherry Hills Village) said:

“I think it is our responsibility that every single Coloradan, regardless of their wealth or position in society, get the health care they need … It is our obligation.”

Let’s say this is true:

  • Then why is it government’s responsibility to make sure everyone “takes responsibility”?
  • Why is HB 1273 the only way to be responsible?  Are there not others?
  • If politicians force citizens to be “responsible,” then are we really being responsible?
  • Why stop at payment? How about mandatory blood donations?  Or kidneys?
  • Why stop at Colorado?  What about other states, and countries?
  • Why stop at health care?  How about food, shelter, and clothing?
  • What is health care, anyway?  Emergency care, life-saving care, treatment that is 20% likely to work? “Grey area medicine“? Treatments that are used now?  Or treatments used as of 1990, or 1980?  Who decides?  (Answer: politicians)

But why is this true?  Why is “our responsiblity”?

What facts make it the responsibility of everyone in Colorado to be responsible for the medical care of everyone else?  Some might say it’s because health care is “a right.”  It is not.

I can imagine people choosing to take on responsibility.  If so, they can donate to a charity, or volunteer time, or start their own charity.  It’s just intolerant and immoral to impose this belief on others.

We spend a lot of time making economic arguments. But the moral arguments need attention, as this is what drives many people.  As Ayn Rand has written:

People are not embracing collectivism because they have accepted bad economics. They are accepting bad economics because they have embraced collectivism.

tags: , , , , ,
  • Judy Nicholaisen
    I want no one to make a profit on my health. Medicare works just fine, VA works just fine, Police & Fire works just fine. U.S. politicians have great health care. This is the kind of health care I want - with insurance companies one does not have a free choice unless you can pay a huge premium to them. If we had 30 or more medical health care insurance companies they might be more competitive. The companies we have now - what 3 or 4 control the market. What is this about free enterprise?

    Insurance companies determine the care one gets, as in the case of my husband. The insurance company talked to the hospital several times a day to tell the doctors what they can and can not do. They are not certified to do this. This is not ethical. It took me two months to get the insurance company to OK our changing doctors and hospital - by then it was too late. My husband died. I just had cancer and I had to pay out of pocket -which I could really not afford - to get a second opinion which the insurance company would not allow. NO one should make a profit off of our health - to me this is not ethical.


    Brian replies:
    Judy says: "What is this about free enterprise?" I agree, the U.S. does not have a free-market in medicine or insurance, as I've written about countless times, e.g. here. In a free market insurance companies would have to compete for customers' business much more than they do now. With

    Judy writes: "NO one should make a profit off of our health - to me this is not ethical."

    Let me try to understand this: If your car needs repair, is it OK to pay someone to fix it, even though that person may make a profit from doing so? For sake of argument, say you think it's unethical. Then I suppose you could find someone who won't profit from it. But what gives you the right to stop others from paying a for-profit auto mechanic? And what about the rights of auto mechanics, or doctors for that matter? Do they not have the right to enter into voluntary relationships with consenting adults to exchange goods and services?

    What do you do for a living? I as


  • Ray Wulfe
    Blah blah blah...All this high falutin' philosophical blather sounds really good until comparing it against the difficulties that increasing numbers of people face in getting proper healthcare.

    It's one of the two or three biggest impediments to liberty facing middle class families today. Get a clue....


    I do not find this comment very helpful, Ray. How do you determine the right course of action without confronting ethical issues? Would you be OK with mandatory blood donations? How would you go about deciding? I am reminded of what Ayn Rand says about pragmatism.
blog comments powered by Disqus