A Chaos-Driven Path to Single Payer?
There is already a precedent showing that Obama's people are not averse to removing key features from a system's normal design. In 2008, his presidential campaign deliberately chose to "manually disable the safeguards ... in place to verify a person’s address and zip code with the cardholder’s bank." This enabled unidentifed and unidentifiable small-dollar contributions from all over the world to pour into the campaign, likely to the tune of millions of dollars. From all appearances, as the press slept, the 2012 campaign did the same thing.
As the mountain of evidence supporting deliberately induced chaos piles up, the obvious question is: What’s their end game? I wish I knew, but what follows seems plausible.
Readers who follow the British press may have caught the news that patients have been turned away from emergency rooms in Northern Virginia, while others who arrived for treatment of possibly serious medical conditions chose to walk away when presented with a requirement to pay or promise to pay several thousand dollars out of pocket because of uncertainties about the status of their coverage. (Unfortunately most of the U.S. establishment press appears to be so intimidated by this administration that it won't dare relay such important developments.)
It’s reasonable to believe that situations such as these are occurring throughout the nation. The only question is their frequency.
It won’t be long before a few patients who have tried and failed to get treatment die or suffer serious, debilitating complications. Who will get blamed when this happens?
In cases where the unresponsive government is at fault — which I believe will be most of them — bureaucrats will bury or destroy the damning details and count on their reliable press apparatchiks and captive hospitals, other medical providers, and insurance companies to look the other way.
I suspect that the administration is lying in wait for high-visibility opportunities to pounce on any providers who fail to provide care to duly enrolled patients, and to pillory insurers who erroneously refuse to pay for customers' life-saving treatments. Particularly tragic circumstances would give the single-payer crowd openings to say, "See? They can’t be trusted. Keeping the private sector involved was a mistake. The government has to control healthcare, or it won't work."
A large portion of a populace conditioned by a half-century or more of "business is evil, government is good" in the education system might buy it.