Health Care or Afghanistan...Which One Deserves More Attention and Money?

Putting the economy and current recession, the two biggest issues I would say are the ongoing wars in the Middle East and health care. President Obama and Congress, with that in mind, will soon make defining choices about the Afghanistan War and health care. The commonality between the two: they both require large amounts of money. That would lead one to believe that we can't have enough to fully finance both. Thus bringing one to think, "What is more important?": either fighting in the deserts of Afghanistan or building up America's health care. The war is on foreign soil while there are things like health care that could help Americans in the United States.

Looking at the costs, the total cost in Afghanistan has been running around $1 million per year per solider. These costs only factor in what has been spent and what is being spent and not considering what costs there might be down the line in the next 5 or 10 years and beyond. We must consider that when these men and women return; many need disability benefits and other treatments especially brain trauma examinations. It is estimated that very soon President Obama will send another 30,000-40,000 troops to the 68,000 already in the country and region. These troop deployments would almost certainly raise the costs into the $100 billion region. Then, there is health care reform. The estimated 10 year cost has been suggested to average between $80 billion to $110 billion per year; pending any adjustments.

This leads to a tough dilemma: a war vs health care. War supporters denounce health care reform and the money it will waste while then turn and endorse spending the same amount on a war in Afghanistan. The same could be said of supporters of reform when they say don't waste money on a war, but spend it on reform for health care. The questions begin to be risen. We see many suffering or dying due to the lack of health insurance they have or none at all. We see many getting wounded or dying in Afghanistan; especially in the last year. A Harvard study shows that individuals die from a consequence of lack of health care coverage every 12 minutes in the United States. To put that in a bigger perspective, every three weeks those individuals who die from lack of health insurance equals the amount of people who were killed on September 11th. Matters are only getting worse with more companies cutting costs and insurance companies denying or canceling coverage. That means that more people are not insured with these changes happening at a moments notice. However, we see troops and forces in Afghanistan in need of more bodies and supplies. If we are to fight this war and hopefully end it soon; we must handle it correctly with proper maneuvers.

It would probably go without saying that the current health reform legislation in Congress is not ideal and does not seem to be signed into law anytime soon. It may not cover all the bases, but it does present progress to what seems to be a problem that is only getting worse as we face an economic recession. The Afghanistan War is also not a perfect entity. Troop deployments are not exactly a clear cut popular decision and some doubt their effectiveness in serving their purpose. So, that leaves one to ask: where should $100 billion a year be spent? The Helmand province in Afghanistan or in many of the cities across the United States for health care reform?

Call me crazy, but I think both can be done. I put more importance in health care reform as it effects everyone here in the United States as the Afghanistan War only partially affects the United States. The money spent on health care reform will pay for itself in the future and is meant to be a lasting investment for all who need the coverage. The money that would be spent on the war has a short term window and goal. However, it would be foolish to let the war end the way it is now. It would be wrong to leave the troops over there undermanned. So, let's put the necessary money and time into the war while still keeping in mind that we need health care reform. We have been known to multi-task before. Why can't we do it again now?