Solutions to lowering the cost of healthcare for the military

As a former military member, anything that has something to say about the military will always spark my interest.  This article by Donna Cassata of the Associated Press titled Health care costs a hefty price tag for Pentagon is no exception.  Since some find approaching this topic as lethal as touching the third rail in the subway, I’ve decided to offer another way of thinking about this.

The article mentions that “costs of the program that provides health coverage to some 10 million active duty personnel, retirees, reservists and their families have jumped from $19 billion in 2001 to $53 billion in the Pentagon's latest budget request.  The explosive expense of health care rivals what the Pentagon shells out to buy fighter aircraft, submarines and high-tech weapons, and is about half of the $118 billion that the Obama administration wants in the next budget to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”  The problem really isn’t whether the receiver should pay more or not, it’s the government refusing to pay such a high price for it.  Basically my point is as long as manufactures of anything the government buys knows that it’s the government buying it, their prices goes straight through the roof.  Their prices keeps increasing because of one reason and one reason only, the government keeps paying it.  The solution is to actually start really shopping around, there are or can be veteran owned, women or minority owned companies which could be contracted to deliver these same items and equipment at a far less cost than they are paying now.  How may businesses that you know who will lower their prices just for the heck of it?

In this same article it is also reported that  “congress repeatedly has resisted Pentagon efforts to increase copayments or fees, arguing that members of the military and their families sacrifice far more than the average American, with a career that includes long and dangerous deployments overseas that overshadow civilian work” and final I think this is a solid argument, I still say that a diligent search for the same product from different vendors who are looking at the government as their own private piggy bank is the best way to go.  There are veterans out there right now who are more than capable of running a company that would be more than willing to see their fellow members properly treated and cared for.  They would not see them as a dollar sign with legs but a brother and sister in arms.  They would do it because they understand better than some ivory-league college graduate who happened to land on Wall Street instead of going to Main Street.  It is surely some women owned businesses out there who could also deliver for much less.  Many of whom would be more guided by meeting their financial obligations while caring for the rest of us.  It’s in their nature and many will not sway from it.  They would do it because they instinctively know that this nation thrives and survives as long as we all do so.

It was reported that a tomahawk missile cost over a million dollars to acquire.  I fail to accept that we can not find a jenny bird missile that can cause the same amount of damage for less than a million dollars.  If they are not out there now, imagine the jobs created to manufacture it.  It’s time for Washington to look past making those who sacrifice pay and start looking at the acquisition costs as the only truly way to lower cost.  If you really needed a taco but had very little money, you probably would choose Taco John’s over Taco Bell.  It’s accusation that is the cause of the high cost of healthcare or anything else, its acquisition.