Social Policy - Clinton's Stand on Health Care

In his article – http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/28/us/politics/28clinton.html – journalist Kevin Sack of the New York Times explores the controversial issue of health care in the United States, exposing Hillary Rhodam Clinton’s views toward the issue. An objective author, he presented the perspectives of the Presidential contender thoroughly and without bias, formulating the basis of his piece on an extensive interview with the former First Lady regarding health policy. Yet, Sack effectively weaves meaningful, relevant facts and figures thus providing concrete information so that citizens may form opinions of their own concerning the subject. In addition, critical readers will appreciate how the journalist includes the stances of Clinton’s rivals – Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama – therefore lending credibility to the piece. Offering a comprehensive, thought-provoking examination of Hillary Clinton’s outlook on health care, individuals benefit from Sack’s straight-forward, candid voice.
The fact that the United States is the only prosperous, developed nation that does not provide universal health care indicates a serious defect in its prevention, treatment, and management of illnesses. In juxtaposition with wealthy, industrialized countries such as England, France, and Switzerland, health care in the United States entails a complicated and inefficient structure. As with all modern day issues in the United States, economics prompt heated debate in regards to the matter. Hillary Clinton contends that the enormous sums of money appropriated to our health care system does not justify the results, stating how “It’s heartbreaking how much we spend on things that don’t produce a doctor at a bedside or a nurse taking care of a patient.” Further appealing to the emotions of citizens, the aspiring Presidential candidate believes universal health care coverage demonstrates a “moral imperative” as well.
Clearly, health care is an essential element for maintaining physical well-being in today’s society; in fact, the University of Dayton now expects every student to possess health insurance starting Fall 2008. However, despite the beliefs of any political figure, the uncertainties that now lessen knowledge of the health care system in the United States must be reduced if worthwhile conclusions relating to policy decisions are to be constructed. First and foremost, officials on both sides of the rift must be willing to work together, despite the fact that intense polarization weakens their hope for real progress. Unfortunately, the middle ground in the argument over universal health care has become so narrow as to be nearly invisible.
Through an informative, unbiased article, Sacks opened my eyes and ears to Hillary Clinton’s ideas pertaining to universal health care. My conclusion: both sides must strive towards negotiation and compromise in order to solve the issue.