Editing 77-24-A7 (section)

= National Health Insurance II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
On my last broadcast, I compared some health care cost figures for private hospitals and for those run by the government. Today i'd like to talk about some other comparisons we should be making.
I'll be right back.

The believers in socialized medicine, which for selling purposes they referred to as national health insurance, occasionally try to arouse our guilt feelings by saying how far we are behind other more enlightened nations. They talk of a total government medical program replacing our present pluralistic system of government help for the needy plus private fee for service but they shy away from any actual comparison with nations which have total government-run health care.

One of the most persistent advocates of government medicine, Senator Kennedy, visited a nursing home in Denmark for two hours and was quite pleased with what he saw. Apparently, however, he never heard the Danish administrator of their socialized health plan say, “Don't ask me how to control medical costs.” Virtually all of Europe's socialized medicine is afflicted with rising costs, underfunding bureaucratic ineptness, decline in quality care, over usage, personnel and facility shortages and lack of capital for scientific modernization.

In England, they've resorted to cutbacks and sweeping reforms, still a senior official says, quote, “Yes, we've gone too far. Waits for medical service are growing longer. fees have doubled.” An English sociologist says, “Medical nursing and paramedic personnel most of whom enthusiastically accepted the challenge of British National Health Service and enthusiastically tried to treat patients as patients are now soured, disenchanted and militantly organized in their own special interest. Public administrators override the independence of professional medical opinion. Progress raises expectations which can't be fulfilled. The best professionals are few in number, therefore it's impossible for more than a few to receive the best care. The latest scientific techniques rest upon expensive equipment, therefore only a few enjoy its benefits.” End quote.

Then came this telling line, quote, “Neither socialized nor private medicine can change these basic facts, but socialized medicine induces the belief that it can.” A year or so ago the people of Sweden voted Karl Marx out after 40 years of socialism. Maybe this statement by a Swedish official explains why it sounds a little like England. Waits for medical service are growing longer, fees have doubled, the new hospital in Stockholm stands half completed for lack of funds, doctors leave the country in the summer to escape confiscatory taxes. The income tax rate $33,000 of earnings is 102. Alcoholism, drug addiction, VD, mental illness and suicide rank among the highest anywhere.

Is there anything in these comparisons to make us want to imitate any of them? As I've said before you can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patient. Isn't it time we as patients gave the doctors a hand in their fight to keep medicine out of government's hands.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.


</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2">&nbsp;</TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>11/29/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-236]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>