Annotative Bibliography

The topic for my research paper is healthcare. I am passionate about it and, I find it very
interesting. I wanted to know more about certain aspects of it such as, the cost of healthcare, is
there adequate coverage in the united states, and the role medical insurances plays in all of it.
While I was doing some research about this topic, I decided to make it about the overall cost of
healthcare. I think that healthcare cost should be regulated by the government. If the government
could control that aspect of healthcare, people wouldnt have to spend ludicrous amounts of
money on insurance. Also, people wouldnt go into debt to pay back a medical bill for a mishap
accident or needing emergency care. I think that all Americans would benefit from government
intervention with regards to universal healthcare cost.
Frank, Robert H. "A Health Care Plan So Simple, Even Stephen Colbert Couldn't
Simplify It." The New York Times. 15 Feb. 2007. Web.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/15/business/15scene.html?_r=0>.
Robert H. Frank is a professor at Harvard business school. In the article he talks about the
sky rocketing cost of health care, which cost America 2 trillion dollars each year, plus 40 million
Americans that are still uninsured. About 31% of the 2 trillion goes to administrative costs, not to
medical care. One proposal is to develop a single pay system in which the government would
cover the cost in a medical expense then would be taxed for those services. That way the patient
wouldnt have to incur late charges form the doctor or medical facility. Also, in the plan
individuals could purchase additional coverage. The 21 countries that, have higher life
expectancy, adopted this system. Canada for example only spends less than 17% on
administrative cost plus, everyone is insured.

After reading this article I agree with the proposal to introduce a single pay system. There
is evidence that this system works for other countries. so, why not here? I think that everyone
would benefit from this because it will increase coverage and stop unnecessary spending on
administrative cost. Having the payment become part of a tax will insure that the individual will
pay back for the services. If someone has an accident and cant come up with the money to pay
the medical bill but, it could cause them to miss work or cause them to go into debt that will take
time to pay back. This system will help cut the cost of late fees and get the individual back to
work faster without, the added stress of the medical bill.
"Controlling Health Care Costs." AFL-CIO. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.
<http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Health-Care/Controlling-Health-Care-Costs>.
This website state there are two fundamental problems with the American healthcare
system and if they are not addressed, it will ultimately bankrupt our government. the first key
issue is changing the incentives that encourage the delivery of expensive, wasteful and
inefficient care.. secondly, we have to counter the market concentration in our health care
system. They talk about the downfalls of Medicare and changing the eligibility age from 65 to
67.
I agree with this website. It talks about having healthcare for everyone and to reduce
unnecessary spending. I disagree with the ideas of having the consumers pay for out of pocket
costs. I think that itll make it harder for lower income families to acquire adequate coverage.
This source fits in perfectly about addressing the issue of government controlled healthcare. It
goes over possible solutions and talks about failing policies.

Kling, Arnold. "Government and Health Care: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly." Cato
Institute. Http://tcsdaily.com, 2007. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
The article talks about providing more access to care, better quality of care, and lowering
the cost of healthcare. He classifies ideas for each aspect as either a good, bad, or ugly idea for
better healthcare reform. Kling states that having the government control what care a family
qualifies for will be negative. Having the family go to a private provider and then receiving a
voucher will have more benefits. He also talks about how certain types of systems have worked
and failed in other countries. Such as the P4P plan in England.
This article made me ask myself if the government controls costs will the quality of care
go down due to the lack of market competition. I agree with him in regards to the voucher
system. Also, I agree with the idea of having the government analyze data to ensure proper care
is provided at reasonable cost.
"Understanding the U.S. Health Care System." InterExchange. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.
<https://www.interexchange.org/articles/abroad/2015/08/10/understanding-us-healthcaresystem/>.
This webpage goes over the history of healthcare in America, it discusses the
governments policies, such as Medicare. The page goes over attempts of the federal government
to nationalize healthcare, back in the early 20th century Theodore Roosevelt pushed for a
government controlled healthcare system, but neither parties voted for it. Then, it talks about
health insurance and how it works. By paying a monthly fee youre guaranteed coverage from a
physician, who work out payments with insurance companies. The last part talks about the
affordable care act. It sets rules for insurance companies such as, no insurance company can
refuse coverage because of a preexisting condition.

This webpage fits in with my question because it talks about the attempts of the
government to control the healthcare system. I agree with page because the government should
cover all Americans and would have a better chance to lower healthcare costs with hospitals,
physicians, and drug companies. This page made me think about the attempts by former
presidents and politicians that pushed for nationalized healthcare.
Tanner, Michael D. "Universal Health Care Not Best Option." Cato Institute. The Bulletin, 2009.
Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
This article talks about the downsides to universal healthcare. The wait times are longer
in countries like France plus, they pay about the same out of pocket as Americans do for care.
Later it talks about the taxes that each citizen pays for healthcare. It also states that for the
moment those governments are paying less for healthcare. Tanner suggests that putting
healthcare in the market should create competition which, should lower the cost for care. He
believes that countries are trying to make a system more like the United States.
I dont agree with Tanner in regards to competition driving the cost of care lower. We
have data on the free market and cost are only increasing. There arent enough doctors to create a
good market for price competition. This made me think about all the people opposed to
government intervention in healthcare. I agree that taxes should increase with healthcare but we
need to spent it better to ensure care for all at reasonable prices.
Klein, Ezra. "What Liberals Get Wrong about Single Payer." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 13 Jan. 2014. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.
This article goes over the down falls of the affordable care act and single pay system.
Also, it addresses the cost of care in the United States and other countries. For example, an MRI

cost on average 1,121 dollars in the United States and 363 dollars in France. Then, it talks about
the lack of negotiating skills of insurance companies to pay for reasonable cost.
I agree that either the government should set the cost of care or that the market should
create competition for prices. Klein does a good job at looking at multiple solutions to fix
healthcare cost in America. It fits in with my research question looking at a government run
system then comparing it to a private system.
To conclude, by reading these sources and looking at data from the past I still stand by
my idea of having government intervention in healthcare. I see that private healthcare systems
have the potential to lower cost, through competition but, looking at data its not lowering the
cost in the American system. Im confused about how we as a country can better utilize are
medical spending. I would like to see new plans for government healthcare.
Opinion Summary
I think that the government should regulate healthcare costs. The research I have done
shows that private for profit insurance companies can still exist but prices need to be regulated
by the government. Going into this research I had the idea that healthcare should be nationalized.
The majority of the articles I read also agreed with my stance such as Klein, Kling, and Frank.
Ive read some thoughts about the healthcare but, felt that the articles didnt fall within my topics
parameters. I found that the two sides either are for privatized healthcare providers or
government regulation programs like, the voucher program. I think that in theory having a
competitive market will ultimately drive costs down but, the market we have now is increasing
prices without regulation and if its not addressed soon, will bankrupt the government and
families. Of all the sources Ive read they all point out one thing and that is, the government is

spending too much money on health care. They all agree that cost for care are increasing at
ridiculous rates. They provide possible solutions to the problem through different means. One
relies on competition and the other regulated prices for drugs and services. I agree with Tanner
that taxes shouldnt go up to cover more healthcare. I disagree with him that competition will
drive down the cost because data has shown the lack of negotiation skills from insurance
companies. We pay more for every medical service in developed countries. Competition had
played little role in how the cost regulate plus, we still have millions of Americans who dont
have access to healthcare. This research has shown that total government control will not work
but having it set cost for care decrease insurance payments and save people money in the long
run. Frank points out the statistics of countries that have nationalized health care with a life
expectancy higher than the United States and they all have similar systems furthermore; they
dont spend nearly as much on healthcare as we do. I think that we, as a nation should looks at
the data from other countries and come up with policies that will help drive down the cost of
care. I dont agree with privatizing healthcare because this industry is not like others the motives
are different compared to other business. Its not a constant need for care it has a more individual
approach, this makes it different from other for profit business and I think should be governed by
different rules because the current system is failing us. Its costing us trillions of dollars each
year while still not proving care for all. A couple of my sources are professors in business and
economics and have studied the data about where the money is going and, more than 30% in not
going towards care at all but to administrative costs. The proposal I have read about is a voucher
program. This way people will be able to receive care without having to pay large upfront cost. I
dont think care should be given out for free but not at the prices that they currently are.