There’s an old saying “you can’t get blood out of a turnip.” Our president obviously doesn’t adhere to this saying. Obama claims requiring everyone to have health insurance is not a tax increase; rather it is just an attempt to get folks without health insurance to pay their fair share of the costs they pass on to the present system — a fine, a fee, not a tax.

Forty-seven million uninsured ought to be up in arms. I think it is safe to say there is a large contingent of uninsured who are young and relatively healthy; their burden on health care costs is relatively minor compared to his proposed $3,500 “fee” or “fine.” It’s the catastrophic that run up the costs.

The State of Massachusetts has tried this approach with the state supplementing front-end costs; this idea dates back to Mitt Romney’s days as governor. It was an interesting experiment in a state that has been on the edge of bankruptcy since the Dukakis days. Massachusetts has apparently found it difficult to enforce as a sizable number of residents are reported to still not have health insurance and, as you might expect, the costs continue to rise by some estimates faster than the national average.

Income per capita in Massachusetts is well above the national average; overlay this kind of forced placed insurance across states with large numbers of low wage earners, high non-employed or many cash-only/barter workers is inviting a confrontation difficult to control or enforce.

To compare a requirement for health insurance to requiring liability insurance on autos is an apple vs. orange comparison, and some are now questioning if it really isn’t unconstitutional.

Initially you might jump to the conclusion that only those who do not currently pay for their health care or carry insurance would be penalized (taxed). No, this is not correct.

Who would pay for health insurance costs for lower income citizens or senior citizens? How many employers who pay a portion or all of health insurance costs for their employees would like to drop their health plans in favor of the government picking up the tab? Who is going to pay for the family health needs? Many employers with large numbers of employees have self-insured plans, an attempt to hold down costs; although the employee usually pays an assessed amount for the family coverage plus a deductible when used. An employer often picks up all the administration costs and a portion of “extreme care” costs for families under their group administered plans.

With the government’s involvement, we the taxpayers would front for the incentives to the uninsured to pay for minimal insurance coverage for an estimated 25 million to 30 million of the so-designated 47 million currently uninsured; plus many others who already pay for their insurance; this would not begin to touch the costs for the catastrophic.

The government would need a massive administrative tracking and enforcement agency. What would we do, toss families without insurance in jail and deny them emergency care? Of course not! If a family felt they couldn’t afford the insurance before, how are they suddenly going to pay a fine plus insurance costs?

I heard that the president claims almost half of the costs for coverage for all would come from Medicare; a government program that is already projected to go broke within the decade without more taxes.

Are we being set up? Is there an attempt to divide? Is it really that difficult to understand? Are we so embedded into politics that we’re not using the old noggin? Why would anyone support packages that are being tossed about? There are too many ideas on the table at one time and too much cost when we already have a huge shortfall in the treasury.

Correct the abuse areas first! That in itself might surprise everyone. This won’t happen, though, because too many of those in power are there with the support of current abusers to the system.

Why is it so difficult? Spin it however you want, there is no free healthy lunch or just a free lunch.

It gets down to how much do you want or how much can you afford? I really had hopes the abuses would be attacked first, then we would have a better handle on what the real costs might be. In the meantime, Barbara and I will continue paying $8,000 each year in health insurance premiums plus another $4,000 for long-term care insurance; yes, we’re old and under Medicare.

Konrad Heid lives in Joplin.