The health-care debate shouldn't be partisan

With increasing interest, I have followed the ongoing debate over national health care/insurance. As a nation, we spend more per capita on health care than every other "developed" country, yet lag many of those same countries by most measures of success. The system is broken, and we need to make changes -- big changes, not just tweaks.

Everyone knows people who are without health-care insurance. Everyone knows people who are examples of the failure of our system.

Medicare cuts, pre-existing conditions, Cadillac plans, uninsured Americans, women's health, preventive and hospice care, copays, the public option, subsidies, guaranteed benefits, penalties to companies, abortion ... these are all very complicated issues for which there are precious few clear-cut answers. I would expect their consideration to be similarly divergent but not along party lines.

Here's my dilemma: Our congressional representatives are ideally responsible for representing the best interests and the wishes of those they represent or at least voting their conscience -- then to be judged by their constituents. Yet, for every senator, bar none, their position on this seminal bill is determined by their political affiliation rather than honest evaluation of the merits. How can every Republican not see the benefits that every Democrat apparently sees in this plan?

I think we deserve more objectivity.

BILL CHARLTON
Troy Hill