Canada's ObamaCare Precedent

Wall Street Journal by David Gratzer | Jun. 9, 2009 (Opinion)
Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly.

Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that established a government monopoly of health services. Claude Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing ... Full Story »

Posted by Kaizar Campwala

See All Reviews »

View | |

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Review

Member_photo_thumb
3.7
 by Walter Cox - Jun. 9, 2009

The central point of this story--that government meddling leads to rationing of healthcare, which causes unacceptable delays--is a good one. The author spotlights the Canadian and British healthcare systems to prove his point. What is lacking is proper perspective; the two national healthcare systems that are top-rated by the WHO are the French and Japanese systems, neither of which feature government rationing of heathcare and both of which offer comprehensive on-demand care that is superior to that offered in the U.S. Despite this lack of perspective the warning is appropriate: in reforming our healthcare system we must avoid government meddling that leads to rationing and delayed care.

I share the author's concern that the U.S. is rushing into a system of government-dominated healthcare. I believe this concern is well-justified: Obama has clearly stated that this is a "now or never" situation, and there is every indication that the pressure is overwhelming to pass SOMETHING, even if the legislation is ill-conceived. It should be noted that the top-rated systems leave medical decisions in the hands of doctors--NOT INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND NOT GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS.

(12 answers)

Walter's Rating

Overall
3.7

Good
from 12 answers
Quality
3.6
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Style
4.0
Context
3.0
Expertise
3.0
Originality
3.0
Relevance
4.0
Responsibility
3.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »