My Mother Was Right About Health Care

Throughout this presidential campaign, I have paid careful attention to each of the Democratic candidates' proposed health-care plans. In previous presidential elections in which I had been eligible to vote, any mention of health care usually faded into the monotone of campaign talking points. "This doesn't affect me, at all," I thought. But this time around, it's different.

Now, as a twentysomething no longer dependent on my parents, yet not yet settled into my career, I admit that I have gone without health insurance for brief periods of time, and I know I am only one of many in my generation who do so.

So my ears perked up when I heard Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton explain that if she became president, health insurance would become mandatory. You mean, I would have to get health insurance? I don't have a choice? This mandate sounded strangely familiar ... and then I remembered a conversation with my mother.

"If you got into a serious accident that landed you in the hospital today, it would bankrupt us," she said. "Not buying health insurance is the most selfish thing you could possibly do."

My mother, of course, was right. I may be an adult and responsible for my own health, but if I were ever in dire need of care that I couldn't afford, the people in my life who would always feel responsible for me - my parents - would step in and foot the bill, no matter the cost.

Unfortunately, the same reasoning applies to all Americans who for one reason or another do not purchase health insurance. Some may not feel the necessity, but if they were to land in an emergency room after a serious accident, they would not be turned away. Maybe they would be fortunate enough to have parents who could - and would - pay their bills, but more than likely they would not. Instead, the cost of their medical bills would be transferred to those who do have insurance, in the form of higher health insurance premiums and co-pays, and to everyone in the form of higher taxes.

Sen. Barack Obama has refrained from calling for such a mandate. On his Web site, he declares, "My plan begins by covering every American." Yet clearly it does not. And even he has conceded this point. Under his plan, health insurance coverage remains voluntary.

In debates, he has countered Clinton's argument for a mandate with the claim that the only reason all Americans do not have health insurance is because they cannot afford it. Make it affordable, and every American will choose to purchase it, he argues.

Yet in a CBS/New York Times poll in March 2007 on presidential issues, only 52 percent of respondents who did not have health care listed the inability to afford it as the reason they were uninsured. Others listed reasons such as unemployment, part-time employment, or even that they lacked a need for health insurance.

But many of us don't need a poll to know that Obama's reasoning is wrong.

As a young person who had so far enjoyed a life of almost perfect health, my own failure to purchase health insurance was not a result of my inability to do so, but rather my unwillingness to spend my limited money on health insurance.

Further underscoring the need for Clinton's health insurance mandate were the results of a recent study by the American Cancer Society that translated into hard statistics a truth that many Americans have been aware of for years, yet have done nothing to change: Uninsured Americans, and those covered through Medicaid, are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer in its latest stages, and are more likely to die from cancer, than are patients with private insurance.

On Clinton's campaign Web site, among many pages dedicated to explaining her health care plan, there is one that specifically addresses cancer and acknowledges this very problem:

"Studies consistently show that those who lack insurance or who are underinsured have higher cancer mortality rates than those with high quality coverage," it reads.

The page explains in great detail how she will combat the scourge of cancer in the United States, including increased funding for research, prevention and screening, and treatment. But the most important and powerful method she offers for solving this problem is mandatory health insurance for all Americans.

Obama argues that Clinton's mandate is not a mandate at all if Americans are unable to afford health coverage, yet will be punished if they don't buy it. But I am confident Clinton will be able to address this dilemma, given that she demonstrates a much keener understanding of the need for universal health coverage than Obama.

But maybe it is not his fault. Maybe it just takes a mother's unique insight to recognize the benefits of mandating insurance coverage, and her slightly threatening and persuasive tone to get us to actually comply. But because my mom's not running for president this time around, I feel compelled to endorse the one who is.