Before I even start, I want to make a couple of things clear:
- I'm uninformed and I know it. So are you (more than likely, anyway). I haven't even seen this bill, and have only heard it reviewed by a handful of sources. Even if I had seen it, it's 2300+ pages of post-graduate legalese reading, so I would STILL be uninformed. I can only form an opinion based on sources I trust.
- I'm biased in that my son, up until this bill passing, was about to become uninsurable, with a debilitating pre-existing condition that was going to financially ruin him at the age of 18.
So, I wish they'd think of a few things before arguing over this further, dragging their good names and the good name of our country through the muck and mire further:
- We can all agree that healthcare as it stands is BROKEN. It came up on both sides during the debates. So why keep it? Sure, we can't agree on how to "fix" it, but that doesn't mean you should stagnate! If you take a serious illness to three different doctors and get three different opinions, "nothing" is almost certainly NOT the right thing to do. Sooner or later, you're going to have to pick a treatment and see how it works for you. You may pick wrong. You may have to revisit that decision down the line. Why is this any different? The new ideas are surely going to be imperfect, lopsided and broken ... but we haven't been able to get what we have to work, so why fight so hard for what we can all agree is broken?
- Sometimes change for change's sake is good. Sometimes, when my kids aren't getting along, the easiest way to fix it is to change something. If they're constantly fighting over seats in the van, move the carseats and insert some chaos. If they're fighting over what cereal to eat in the morning, buy some new kinds and stop buying the old. If my code is not doing what it should, make a change that should do something minor, or even nothing, and see what effect it has. Sometimes making a change for the sake of change can highlight not only what was wrong in the old system, but what was right. Then you can re-evaluate and make a more informed decision on where to go next.
That way, the next 2300+ page reform has that much better chance of getting it closer to right. And the one after that. And the one after that.
TL;DNR version: How does holding on tightly to the status-quo while admitting the status-quo is broken not fit Einstein's definition of insane? I truly don't understand.
I'm pretty sure I can survive this "Healthcare Reform" ... if only I can survive so-called congressional debates ...