Declaring a 'Right' to Healthcare Feel-Good Symbolism Only

Will Oregon's voters declare a "right" to healthcare?

Voters nationwide took to the polls this week not just to select a new Congress but to settle a number of healthcare policy questions, from curbs on medical debt in Arizona to regulations on dialysis providers in California.

Oregonians were asked to amend the state constitution to declare "access to cost-effective, clinically appropriate and affordable health care as a fundamental right."

As of Thursday, Nov. 10, two days after Election Day, those in favor of the measure had a razor-thin lead of less than 0.5 percentage points —  a margin of a few thousand votes.

But, based on the latest numbers, those in favor of the ballot initiative now have a lead of about one percentage point. Updated information may be found here.

Declaring a right to healthcare is little more than a symbolic gesture, and a deeply confused one at that. It's impossible to guarantee a right to healthcare.

The state can't ban sickness and death, nor can it transform healthcare workers into indentured servants.

Healthcare is a collection of goods and services, just like everything else in our economy.

The goal of health policy should be to make these goods and services as accessible and affordable as possible without compromising their quality.

Treating healthcare as a right does nothing to advance that goal. In fact, it obstructs it.

The proposed constitutional amendment does not create a new program or source of funding. It offers no definition for the terms "cost-effective" and "clinically appropriate." So it's anyone's guess what the practical consequences of the ballot measure may be for Oregonians.

What is clear is that the ballot measure makes Oregon the first state in the nation to include a right to affordable healthcare in its constitution.

Like just about any other good or service, health care is scarce.

Allocating scarce resources inevitably requires tradeoffs.

Declaring healthcare a right pretends that these trade-offs don't exist.

In a world where everyone is guaranteed equal access to healthcare as a basic right, demand for care skyrockets.

Supply, however, remains limited. The result is mass shortages, government rationing, and life-threatening delays for treatment.

This is precisely the situation in universal coverage systems like the United Kingdom's National Health Service.

The NHS technically guarantees public health care to all UK residents. But it cannot meet the outsized demand for care created by this guarantee.

According to the latest government figures, a record 7 million British patients are currently waiting for hospital care. That's more than one in ten UK residents.

The health consequences of these waits have been nothing short of tragic.

A new analysis by the British Heart Foundation found that delayed surgeries, inaccessible care, and slow ambulance responses contributed to 30,000 excess cardiac deaths since the start of the pandemic in England alone.

The case for making healthcare a right in Oregon is even less convincing when one considers the status quo for patients in that state. By all accounts, the current market-based health system is serving Oregonians remarkably well.

According to the Oregon Health Authority, 94% of residents have some form of health coverage. Most of the state's uninsured population qualifies for either subsidized private insurance or the Oregon Health Plan —  the state's Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program.

In other words, the market and existing safety-net programs are already delivering affordable health coverage to Oregonians.

Guaranteeing a right to healthcare may sound good; it's impossible to deliver on.

Countries that try inevitably saddle their people with high taxes that purchase nothing more than access to a waiting list and substandard care.

The Beaver State may soon find out firsthand.

Sally C. Pipes is president, CEO, and the Thomas W. Smith fellow in healthcare policy at the Pacific Research Institute. Her latest book is "False Premise, False Promise: The Disastrous Reality of Medicare for All," (Encounter Books 2020). Follow her on Twitter @sallypipes. Read Sally Pipes' Reports — More Here.