There is rumor that the public option may not be as straightforward as one might think. It may only trigger into effect for those of which private health insurance fails. This has numerous implications.

1. The cost of such a plan is cheaper than insuring millions of Americans, it goes to those who need it the most, but then who decides what is need? How do you prevent abuse from both client and private health insurance agency? No one wants to pay so wouldn’t people try to take advantage of a fail safe, trying to make the government pay for it as the first option?

2. What about those without health insurance now? Will they need to buy a “minimal” plan in order to qualify for the fail safe? Again, what makes anyone purchase more options and spend more if they are going to get something for near free if their insurance “fails”?

3, Businesses will sprout using agovernment fail-safe in order to turn profits. Agencies will try to create health insurance plans of their own, charging a small fee to claim the person has health coverage with no substantial benefits. Then when the medical care is needed, relying on the government.

This just goes to show how complex Healthcare Reform is. Any change is going to be so substantial that it will create opportunity for abuse. Topics need to be thoroughly discussed, but not to the point of boredom and entropy.

Free services are wonderful until they become unreliable. Gmail for instance, has a 99% uptime but sometimes does fail as it showed today around 3:30 PM EST. Strangely, most pay services also fail, the only difference is there is something called accountability. When a free service fails the company is not bound to pay you for the reprecussions of a lack of service. Gmail can stop your service if it wants to. Imagine now that we are doing this to our Health Insurance industry.

What happens when Healthcare all the sudden goes down. Government machines or operators cannot be reached to approve payment. Websites no longer work for submitting paperwork, or doctors stop accepting patients until paperwork is resolved. We all know how long government paperwork takes to push through.

This is not a world that Americans have built. Imagine who is held accountable when the Public Health option fails to deliver. We can only hold ourselves accountable, after all the government is paying for the services, which in the end means we are paying for them out of our own pocket. Silly to sue ourselves for bad business decisions.

This can mean so many different things across the industry that it makes it difficult for people to understand each other with respect to what they think health insurance reform needs to be. This is part of the mistake whether intentional or not by the Democrats. They included so many different areas of the healthcare industry into reform. They included Medicare, Medicaid, private health insurance reform, doctors, hospitals, providers, and administration.

This combination of different health reform areas has confused the average person. In reality, the biggest problem our government wants to alleviate is the growth in costs for Medicare benefits. This is by far the biggest cost problem. The government though is addressing this by wanting to directly cut benefits and utilize these savings to incur additional entitlement benefits for the uninsured. This has angered many seniors and rightfully so.

There are many ways that are far better in addressing cost reductions in Medicare than just simply cutting benefits. Medicare is a badly run entitlement program that begs for reform. This is the real problem that needs to be fixed and not by reducing benefits.

The malady of socialism, whether we are aware of it or not, is spreading fast. There are many Americans that know better and cannot be talked into or politicized to believe that “free” is a justified norm that a society should provide. Nevertheless, there is a strong movement which includes the media that is focused on gradually persuading everyday Americans into believing that this is the right path by which we should all follow. This is very far from the truth.

As human beings, we will always be different in our wants and needs. As much as we are very much alike, we are also very, very different. For a government to propose an agenda that minimizes our individualism is to go against the very grain of our American substance. Yet, this is precisely what would happen if our government becomes our healthcare supplier. To start, this would mean that our doctors would have to fall in line with whatever the government would set in place with respect to reimbursement. This would eliminate any doctor from being able to effectively compete and charge a different fee for their services. This approach encourages and rewards mediocrity. It sets and accepts lower expectations.

This is a far cry from our American spirit which has throughout always viewed competition and hard work as the reason for our success. Our healthcare system needs reform, but not be handed over to our government to manage for us. Our government will never be an efficient operator of any business or any industry.

Our healthcare system through private industry is today a model that will evolve and our ability to attain affordable individual health insurance and family health insurance will improve. Our healthcare is and should be one of our most important industries. This industry needs support and reform, not to be scrapped. One has to just look at our government run Medicare system to imagine how more of that type of an operation would be under a public health plan.