Do politicians think before speaking? No, but then, what fun would that be? Rep. Carol Shea-Porter gives us yet another laughter point when she exclaims that a nationalized health-care system that makes everyone wait in lengthy lines would be preferable to a system that provides responsiveness for 87% of the nation:

“I just wanted to make a couple of comments. I heard one of my colleagues say ‘waiting in line,’ that people would be waiting in line for medical care. I would like to say that many of my constituents would love to wait in line for medical care,” Shea-Porter stated. “They are yanked out of line because they don’t have coverage.”

So once again, the solution in this case is to impose the kind of ex post equity that we usually get from big government programs: equal access to mediocrity, or worse.  The overwhelming majority of Americans do not have to wait weeks and months to see a doctor or get referrals to specialists, which is why more than 80% of us like our current plans.  Shea-Porter wants to toss all that out and replace it with a system that makes all Americans equally sick and provides an equal level of unresponsiveness to everyone.

Why not just focus on actual free-market reform that will incentivize growth in providers and services, give better coverage through incentives and the elimination of state barriers for entry, and lift all boats in the water?  Because that won’t give a select group of elites the power to determine outcomes, which is what is really at stake in this debate.  Shea-Porter’s statement should make their preferred outcome plain for all to see.