“Choice” and the socialized health care debate

Cory Heidelberger makes this argument in the Madison paper:

Thursday's editorial waves the usual red flag of terror at the prospect of government making your health care decisions. Let government pay for health care, and next thing you know, government will be telling you what doctor to see, what pills to take, and so on... so goes the usual refrain. This false thinking ignores the current reality of the for-profit insurance system, where private bureaucrats and insurance company lawyers dictate which doctors you can see and which procedures will be covered, all while devising loopholes to deny you the coverage you thought you were paying for. MDL's argument also ignores the fact that the government is us: we can exert much more control as democratic participants over a public plan run by us and our elected officials than we can exert over any private insurance company whose primary goal is to generate profit, not serve the public good.

If we are in the minority, we will be ruled by the majority. That is "not choice". Today if we don’t like a private plan we can choose another. That is "choice". WE the people dictate what coverage we have, not the one size fits all government. And the public schools proves that when we pay for government programs we don’t agree with, our only choice is to use our own money to use a private school. And that option may not even be available with Obamacare becomes fully developed.