DDO Tier Tournament: The United States ought to guarantee universal health care for its citizens.

Argument 1: Economic My opponent"s argument here is that the life expectancy and infant mortality rates are high in the U.S., despite the fact that the U.S. spends more money. Rebuttal: The problem here is that my opponent is automatically assuming that low life expectancy and high mortality rates equate to having a bad health care system. While a good health care system may, by intervention, extend the life of a small percentage of a population, it has very little to do with the average life spans of the whole population. The number of years a person will live is primarily a result of genetic and social factors, including lifestyle, environment and education. [1] Argument 2: A Viable Alternative In this argument, my opponent states that Universal Healthcare is a viable alternative because by charging less money, the people will have more money, and the U.S. Economy would grow Rebuttal: the problem with universal health care is that it does not guarantee equal quality and treatment. [refer back to my 3rd contention sub-point A]. This causes more patients to get severely sick or die while just waiting to receive their medical treatment. Rebuttal 2: Raising other tax increases to fund reform could place a drag on GDP.[6] If that happens, that will make it far more difficult to escape the debt trap Rebuttl 3: Furthermore, universal Health Care will lead to a moral hazard. The idea of a moral hazard is explained by Mr.Hoffman, who works for the Indiana law journal: "The term "moral hazard" refers to the concern that the acquisition of insurance itself leads to a change in individuals' behavior. Those who have health insurance are more likely to use medical facilities than those who are uninsured, because their use of medical services is subsidized. Thus, health insurance can increase the cost of health care through unnecessary doctor visits." [7] So as we can see, this will only hurt the economy further. Argument 3: Health Care is a right Here, my opponent tries to state that health care is a right Rebuttal 1: My opponent uses the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, to state that Healthcare is a right. However, since the resolution states "The United States", this means that we must look at only United States rights. Rebuttal 2: My opponent also states that the constitution states the clause, "promote general welfare". This clause, nor any other clause in the constitution gives congress the power to create a Universal Healthcare System. The "General Welfare" clause gives Congress the power "To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." [2] This clause is not a grant of power to congress " it is a limit to a power given to Congress, limiting the purpose for which Congress can lay and collect taxes. [3] If the "General Welfare" clause gives Congress the power to promote the general welfare, then why specifically list the other powers in Article I, such as the power to establish post offices and post roads, or to coin money? Wouldn't it be redundant to list them? James Madison, the "Father of The Constitution", argued that Congress derives no power from the general welfare clause, which merely serves to limit Congress"s power to lay andcollect taxes.[4] If the "General Welfare" clause doesn"t give congress any power, we can conclude that it doesn"t give congress the power to create a Universal Health Care System. Rebuttal 3: In order for something to be a right in the U.S., it must be in the constitution. The constitution has had changes over the course of time [these changes are known as amendments], and any rights that are guaranteed under these amendments are also rights under the constitution. If we take in everything I have stated here into consideration, my opponent"s argument that the Health Care is a right fails because: Universal Health Care is not a constitutional guarantee, because Congress has tried to pass Universal Health Care as an amendment before, and FAILED. [5] I have a key question for my opponent: If congress has tried to pass an amendment about Universal Health Care, and it failed to pass, then how is it a right? Argument 4: Benefits to society Rebuttal 1: First my opponent states, "Having greater access to cheap health care." As I have already stated before " Universal Health Care doesn"t guarantee access to health care. [Read: contention 3 sub"point A, of my original case] Rebuttal 2: My opponent states that Universal Health Care will decrease medical expenses. There are some major problems with this argument: 1. As the perceived price decreases, demand will increase. In other words, when people believe that they won"t have to pay for their healthcare, they will use more health services. Allow me to explain this more clearly: As demand increases to exceed the available supply of health services, the government will have to take action. The government will have to limit the amount of services to keep the cost of the healthcare system from exploding. There are several ways to do this. First, they might impose rationing and limit the availability of services, which would completely undermine the purpose of Universal Health Care in the first place. A second option would be increase the amount that patients pay for their health care. This could be similar to the health insurance premiums and co"payments that many health insurance policies contain now. 2. Government Health Care will likely create a shortage of healthcare professionals. The government will undoubtedly attempt to rein in costs by imposing price controls. It has already followed this strategy in government healthcare programs that have already been enacted such as Medicare. Medical training, especially for doctors, is a long and expensive process. The motivating factor for many doctors is the financial reward at the end of the process. When the government removes the financial incentive for becoming a doctor, fewer people will choose to become doctors and shortages will result. If there is low supply and high demand, prices must go up. 3. The money used to pay health professionals, medicines and facilities has to come from somewhere. If consumers don"t pay for these services directly, then they will pay for it indirectly with high taxes. Rebuttal 3: my opponent tries to state that there will be an increase in jobs. As I stated before, doctors and many people in the medical industry won't have an incentive to work anymore. Sources: Sources: [1] John C. Goodman, et al., President National Center for Policy Analysis, 2004, Lives at Risk: Single Payer National Health Insurance Around the World, p. 51 [2] and [4] http://dailysignal.com... [3] http://www.heritage.org... "it"possible"to"restore"constitutionalism [5] Lunder, Erika K. et al. "NFIB v. Sebelius: Constitutionality of the Individual Mandate" CRS. September 3, 2012. 2. [6] http://money.cnn.com..., S. "Unmanaged Care Towards Moral Fairness in Health Care Coverage"Indiana Law Journal. 2003. Pg 670