This post is dedicated to a conversation on health care and rationalization between Ken Shepherd and me. More specifically it is on rationalization and mammograms. Any comments made by others will be deleted.

Ken, you are trying to solve the issue of mammograms with a capitalistic argument. Economies have to enter into that equation at some point, but the scientific questions must be answered first, not how much profit can be accommodated or the principles of supply and demand be met according to some micro-economic theory. Furthermore, it is impossible to solve the economic equation of mammograms or any medical procedure without having scientific based answers to drive the economic variables. That said, there is a more important point that needs to be emphasized.

I am very well versed on capitalism and the principles of free markets, but those are secondary to the debate and they are inherently flawed when it comes to human rights. The debate goes deeper than capitalism and markets. It’s a matter of whether health care is a right or a privilege.

The Right sees health care as a privilege, at best, and the Left sees it as a right. The Right’s argument is all about supply/demand, profit/loss and has zero bearing on morality: corporations take precedence over humanity, always.  People aren’t widgets or LLC’s, but that’s how the Right presents its argument in every case as evidenced by the statements you made:

[E]conomically speaking “rationing” is a reality in an economic system because good are finite and demand is inexhaustible.

[T]he free market rations by prices fluctuating as function of supply and demand.

[B]ut when you disincentivize suppliers from entering the marketplace by killing the profit motive you will hike costs

[A]nd this is where govts come in, imposing artificial price controls leading to shortages and/or substituting govt fiat for…

…the rationing device of the marketplace.

[S]o back to the mammography example. The best policy is to encourage marketplace options for health insurance so women can…

…shop around insurance to find coverage they are most happy with. We need to move in direction of opening up the marketplace…

..and reducing restrix of marketplace entry for new insurance suppliers[.]

In spite of the grossly wrong ruling of the Supreme Court granting personhood to corporations, it is wrong to allow corporations’ interests to enter into the basic argument. Their interests can be debated and adequately accommodated secondarily as shown around the world in other health care systems.

Every industrialized nation in the world provides health care for every individual with the exception of the U.S. And American Exceptionalism is not the rebuttal to that. The free-market-capitalism-first argument just doesn’t apply at the basic level. People are, well, human beings regardless of where they live, and no one in Country X is better or more deserving than those in Country Y. Anyone that believes Country X is more deserving than Country Y doesn’t accept the principles this country was founded upon. Period.

Once the basic argument is addressed, then corporate interests can enter into the equation. For example, I lived in Australia for awhile, and they had a health care system that was a combination of government (primary) and industry (secondary). Standard care was provided by the government. If you wanted more or something different, then you could look to the private sector. But bottom line, the government provided health care for everyone and it was, and still is, superior to what we have here.

I understand where you’re coming from with the capitalism first argument. I used to view things the same way. The almighty dollar came first and I did quite well, but I reached a point where I fortunately realized it was the least important thing. And once I realized that and didn’t make it number one, income just took care of itself, if not better than before.

I could go on quite a bit about priorities, but I won’t. Bottom line: capitalism first is wrong in every sense of the word when it comes to humanity. And capitalism has taken a serious hit of late, so there’s much that can be argued from both sides.

Update: First comments are moderated. If you chose to make one, it will show up as soon as I approve it. After initial approval, any future comments automatically appear.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is conducting a survey. Here are the details from an email I received. Please note, often times campaigns use these tactics to get you on their mailing lists. Obviously they want to do that, but giving them input can’t hurt. (Emphasis in original.)

Last weekend health insurance reform took another big step forward when the House passed their bill on Saturday night. With each passing day, we’re getting closer to finally fixing our tragically broken system.

The bill we merged from the Finance and Health committee versions is being scored by the CBO this week, and hopefully next week we’ll be able to begin debate and continue moving this monumental legislation forward.

Our petition in support of a public option has been so successful (thank you 50,000+ signers!), I want to continue our conversation about health insurance reform. So today, we’re launching an informal mobile survey that you can participate in via text message or online.

To vote, simply take out your cell phone and choose an option below, or participate online by clicking here. We’ll text you the results, and you’ll be registered to receive mobile updates from my campaign in the future.

What’s the most important aspect of health insurance reform?

TEXT A to 42779 for:
Making sure people with preexisting conditions can get affordable insurance

TEXT B to 42779 for:
Prohibiting insurance companies from dropping people when they get sick

TEXT C to 42779 for:
Creating a public insurance option to lower costs by creating competition

TEXT D to 42779 for:
We should not reform health insurance, status quo is ok by me

TEXT your answer (A,B,C or D) to 42779 (HARRY) to vote

If you’d prefer you can take our mobile survey online by clicking here. Either way, thanks so much for participating, we’ll be in touch with results soon.

There is all kinds of wingnutiness out there today and from both chambers of Congress, none the less. We begin with Orrin Hatch, the Republican Senator from Utah warning about the grave dangers of health care reform.

The healthcare reform proposals before Congress threaten the existence of the two-party system, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) alleged Monday morning.

Hatch asserted that the health bills, which he believes represent a "step-by-step approach to socialized medicine," will lead to Americans’ dependence on Democrats for their health and other issues.

"And if they get there, of course, you’re going to have a very rough time having a two-party system in this country, because almost everybody’s going to say, ‘All we ever were, all we ever are, all we ever hope to be depends on the Democratic Party,’ " Hatch said during an interview with the conservative CNSNews.com.

"That’s their goal," Hatch added. "That’s what keeps Democrats in power."

That’s right. Health care reform will destroy the two-party political system in America. Well, I submit that the Rethugs have already done a fine job in that regard. According to the last NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, of those surveyed only 20 percent self-identified as Rethugs. It set a new low record for Rethugs. (Think Whig Party.)

Meanwhile, in other related news, Rep. Virgina Fox (R-NC) took it much further than her colleague in the Senate warning that health care reform was a greater threat to American freedom than “any terrorist right now in any country.”

Everywhere I go in my district, people tell me they are frightened. … I share that fear, and I believe they should be fearful. And I believe the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room — this very room — and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill. I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.

So, there you have it. You’ve been duly warned of the great threats Democrats are hell bent on inflicting upon our great nation and its peoples. Oh, and if you’d like to watch Ms. Foxx’s rant, Think Progress has the video.

Since Harry Reid doesn’t have a spine, we’ll have to settle for humor.

I understood outing a CIA agent as being tantamount to treason. At minimum, it is a felony. But the New York Times doesn’t see it that way. It’s merely a “distraction.”

The Wilson leak was an embarrassing distraction for President Bush and Mr. Cheney, whose role in the episode has remained a mystery that critics hoped would be clarified with the release of F.B.I. interview materials.

It sounds like the piece was authored by Alberto “Quaint” Gonzlaes.

Hey Joe Lieberman, you know that threat you made yesterday to filibuster the public option? Well, your constituents are smarter than you are. They favor the public option 68 – 21. And among independents they support the public option 73 – 15. Why do you hate your constituents, Senator Lieberman?

Don Millard @OTOOLEFAN:

If Karl Rove merely tweeted “Just took a crap,” he’d tag it with #TCOT. Top Crapper On Twitter.

Oh, so now the health insurance industry to ensure its outrageous profits are going to stick it to the business community and business leaders are howling. I guess they are.

Any kind of government-run health insurance program would lead to higher costs for employers, corporate executives representing a big-business group said Wednesday.

The Business Roundtable, an alliance of corporate CEOs, criticized the public option in a conference call with reporters as congressional Democratic leaders intensified their push to include a government plan in their healthcare reform bills.

[...]

The Business Roundtable’s chief argument against the public option is that a government plan would offer lower payments to medical providers who, in turn, would raise the rates they charge for patients enrolled in employer-sponsored health insurance plans.

“It won’t contain costs. It will just shift them to the private payers,” Castellani said. “The state opt-out provision does nothing to blunt that impact.

Via First Read:

Former GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel will be at the White House event this afternoon where he’ll be named by the president as co-chair of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

[...] Hagel will be charged with “overseeing the work of the intelligence agencies for the president and unvestigating [sic] violations of the law” by folks in this community.