Congressman Doctor Paul

So, let's see if I have this right. Congressman Doctor Ron Paul believes the "individual mandate"  in the Health Care Reform Act is both unconstitutional and personally offensive to many or most Americans.

Right so far?

Congressman Doctor also believes that health care is an individual responsibility to be decided upon by each person in consultation with a physician of choice, untrammeled by government annoyance.

Still correct?

And, it's absolutely irresponsible for any adult to take advantage of others by accepting treatment the patient can't actually pay for, shifting the bill indirectly to the the rest of us in the form of higher doctors' fees and taxes.

Am I still getting it?

So, what do we do with people who are too broke to pay for needed care, kids whose parents can't pay, or those who are just freeloaders? Are they just welcome to go somewhere and die? Those ignoble Florida Tea Party people applauded that idea a few months ago.

If you put the question to any of the fanatics of the right, I'll bet they'd insist that everyone must pay for medical services or do without them. In fact, many people do exactly that, and either suffer poor health needlessly or die prematurely.

How do you get these ne'er-do-wells to buy health insurance except by an individual mandate, and since we'd need an enormous, intrusive and costly bureaucracy to identify who would be likely to abscond on a doctor's or hospital's bill, the only solution seems to be to require insurance from everyone.

Am I missing anything here?

Mind you, I don't know how the new law identifies how much health care insurance is sufficient. When I'm feeling cynical or facetious, I think I'd like to start my own health insurance company, the "All You Pay is $8.95 Annually" health insurer that covers fully if you're struck by lightning at the very moment you're being attacked by a shark, but not otherwise.  (Not available in Hawaii California or Florida. Only $5.95 here in Colorado.) "Your policy puts you in compliance with the law without breaking the bank."

If Congressman Doctor was still practicing medicine, would he refuse to treat someone he knew couldn't or wouldn't pay the bill? Or had my insurance?  Or would he jack up his fees for the rest of his patients to cover the time and materials spent on his pro bono case? Or would he just absorb the loss himself, and do without life's needs or desires for himself and his family?

What do  you say, Congressman Doctor?