DEAR EDITOR:

I read an extraordinary health care article a while back. Some ex-convicts were committing new crimes and deliberately violating the conditions of their parole for the purpose of being returned to prison.

This was astounding. The newspaper account went on to explain the “‘why”‘ of it. Means-tested out of government health programs by their diligent pursuit of paid work, some ex-convicts face a terrible decision.

Do they continue on the path of virtue to re-enter society, or do they re-offend to get medical treatment for their chronic ailments in prison medical facilities?

Surely, I thought, our leaders would offer an explanation, if not a solution, as to why health care was a tangled thicket of incentives and disincentives, dead ends and runarounds and lockouts, and radicalized beneficiary populations.

I took statements and actions about health care reported in the media, asked questions, and worked my way back to something that made sense. Genuine experts encouraged me; local and national publications ran some of my articles.

Here are some questions I asked. They’re not trick questions, but they require some technical knowledge, and a serious, disinterested hunger to get at the truth.

Employers lay off workers to preserve group health insurance benefits for non-workers. True or false?

Which country had the most influence on creating America’s unique group health insurance? A. Canada, B. Germany, C. Great Britain, D. Soviet Union, E. None of the above.

Group health insurance covers workers and their families. True or false?

What can you do to put the health care debate on a reality basis free of censorship? Your mission is to restore “‘domestic tranquility”‘ to the distribution of health care. Write your congressman. Ask for a joint House-Senate investigation into the origin, motives, nature and consequences of America’s unique group health insurance.

Volunteer to testify. Clip this letter, endorse it in your own language, and send it to opinion leaders. Remember, expert critical witnesses will not come forth without credible guarantees for their jobs and personal safety. Congress will need a push from you to aggressively recruit those experts and their testimony.

What about group health’s proponents? A House-Senate investigation will offer a good opportunity for group health’s advocates to restate their case under oath on national television for why group health insurance is a good idea for America. Their answers to informed questions posed by motivated representatives and senators will prepare Americans for honest and factual decision-making about America’s health care future.

JACK LABUSCH

Nil