It seems they are saying that each American must have their own MRI machine, each American must hire three nurses, so that round the clock care can be assured, from birth, for each member of the family.

A short TV ad, showing MRI’s being delivered to every suburban home in a neighbourhood, huge white heavy machines, smashing door frames and collapsing floors, as a woman asks the delivery people to “stop, please stop, every home doesn’t need one. Just install a few of these in hospitals” while a suited old guy shoves forward to scream “That… that’s RATIONING!!!!” and the woman says, “Look I’m a nurse, we need to deliver health care just for health reasons, the health needs of this city are a few MRI’s in a few hospitals not this silliness.”

You made some good points about your concern of the changing of the healthcare status quo. I do not agree with your concerns, but you have them none the less.

However, your points on immigration healthcare costs as being some how a major factor in the problems of healthcare are a red herring and really suggest that your agenda is not only to stop healthcare reform, but to also shout uninformed rhetoric about immigration.

Can you cite one credible study that says immigrant healthcare costs are responsible for the problems with the healthcare system (40 mm uninsured, personal bankrupcies, 17% of GDP, low performance vs other countries, rationing by insurance companies, etc.)?

I have looked and I cannot find any. But, here is a report on the issue that seems to suggest that immigrants have very limited to no impact on the healthcare system.

http://udallcenter.arizona.edu/immigration/publications/fact_sheet_no_2_health_care_costs.pdf

A few facts: immigrants are mostly young, they do not tend to be as unhealthy as the old; immigrants use healthcare far less than other citizens; some actually do have health insurance; many pay taxes; etc. etc.

Certainly, comprehensive health reform is needed to control costs and cover the uninsured, and I am pleased that the Administration and congressional leaders have attempted to achieve a bipartisan consensus to that end. There are many worthwhile and far-reaching reforms that should be achievable this year. But I am convinced that a public plan will create an un-level system, undermining what works about the existing employer-provided group health insurance marketplace.

Public plans historically reimburse providers at a lower rate and account for administrative costs differently than private plans. Current public plans like Medicare and Medicaid pay healthcare providers a reduced rate to control costs causing providers to shift their unreimbursed public plan expenses onto private payers which only exacerbates coverage and cost issues. Expanding a public program or offering a buy-in option would only increase the amount of costs being shifted to the privately insured. In the current economic climate, more cost-shifting would only further burden employers and employees that are struggling to afford health care coverage.

The debate over the growing number of uninsured in this country has failed to take into account the enormous impact of immigration on the nation’s health insurance crisis. We cannot hope to contain health care costs or reduce the number of uninsured in the U.S. without addressing the role of immigration policy too. By dramatically increasing the size of the uninsured population, immigration strains the resources of health care providers who provide services to the uninsured. Americans with insurance have to pay higher premiums as health care providers pass along some of the costs of treating the uninsured to paying customers. If we are to deal effectively with the health insurance problem in this country, part of the solution must address immigration policy.

To conclude, please know how strongly I oppose a “public plan option” for consumers. I hope that regular order and bipartisanship will prevail in this debate, and we stand willing to assist you and your staff in any way to help identify the multitude of ways to improve health care for Americans.

To Republicans alarming the public about the imminent rationing of health care, I submit that any health care system rations care. The U.S. just does it indiscriminately and insufficiently. It’s irrefutable that we prescribe and pay for too much unnecessary health care. Let’s move beyond the debate about whether we need a public insurance option. We do. Let’s debate the most relevant and most difficult question: how should we pay for comprehensive health reform?

http://axisofreason.com/2009/07/13/us-private-health-insurance-classic-market-failure/