John Q., National Health Care and the Hollywood Left

Denzel Washington is a brilliant actor who wastes his talent by starring in some really stupid, poorly-written movies. I now only watch his movies whenever I happen to be someplace where one is playing on television. That was the case a few nights ago, when I saw John Q. on the Starz channel. John Q. isn't just a bad movie, though. It's also a two-hour long propaganda piece that extols the virtues of national, government-run health care.

John Q. Archibald, played by Mr. Washington, is the main character. He's a typical blue-collar family man whose son will soon die if he doesn't receive a heart transplant. Mr. Archibald doesn't have health insurance, though, and the hospital isn't willing to perform the surgery if there's no chance of getting paid for it. So, our "hero" follows the only logical path. He gets a gun and takes the staff and patients of the hospital emergency room hostage. His demand is simple; he wants a free heart transplant for his son. When the police make contact with him to negotiate, he states his demand, but gives his name only as "John Q.". The police are left to figure out on their own who is in need of the new heart. (This is one reason why I say the movie is poorly written.) Of course, as luck would have it, a woman gets killed in a cheesily-staged car accident, and a new heart becomes available. The hospital staff finally give in, the kid gets his heart and John Q. finally lets the hostages go. In the process, John Q. becomes a hero for the cause of National Health Care.

During the hostage crisis, the movie's news media go out and interview people on the street concerning the case. The interviewees all echo the same message. The rich don't care, because they can afford health care. The rich don't want to pay the taxes to set up National Health Care. Yadda-yadda-yackity-smack. A stream of liberal politicians-- including Hillary herself--make cameo appearances in which they praise the courage of John Q. and encourage people to vote for National Health Care. No one offers any opposing view.

This movie takes advantage of many American voters' ignorance about history and economics. The movie's producers know that they can bamboozle the public into supporting their socialist pet programs. Had these producers not been allergic to proven fact, they could have included the following:

Socialized health care in other countries has been a disaster. Competition is eliminated, so anyone who isn't satisfied with quality of care no longer has the option to change hospitals or doctors. Any incentive for a customer to control expenses is also eliminated, so the system becomes clogged with people who run to the doctor when they don't really need to; this has already happened in the Medicare system.
Our current health care system isn't perfect. That's partly because of the government meddling that's already taken place. Before World War II, each person was responsible for buying health insurance for himself and his family. If rates were too high, the people in a given community would pool their money to make a bulk buy of health insurance. This would help bring the rates down, and people would be insured even if they were between jobs. During the war, government policies encouraged employers to provide health care insurance for their employees. Because of that, when people lose their jobs, they also lose insurance coverage. It has also taken away some incentive for people to control health care expenses, though not to the extent that socialized health care would.
There's already a National Health Care system in place for the elderly. It's called Medicare. The Medicare system is rife with fraud, and--due to its system of price controls--has caused the cost of care outside of the Medicare system to rise. (Doctors need to charge higher prices for non-Medicare customers in order to make up for the lower fees mandated for Medicare patients.)
For folk like John Q., there are already private charity groups and state grant programs that could have helped him out. Quite a few years ago, back home in my native Virginia, I knew a real life John Q. who had just lost his job--and insurance--when his son needed an operation to repair a hole in his heart. He found out about Virginia's grant program for people in his situation, and obtained the money for the operation.

As you may have guessed, I don't recommend this movie. Even if it weren't for the socialist message, the movie is just plain bad.