Honeycutt spoke for only a few moments before she paused to take questions from the students. While there were several topics mentioned during the question and answer period, one issue dominated the discussion-healthcare. Asked by a student how she felt about universal healthcare, Dr. Honeycutt responded that it was far beyond the time for universal access to affordable healthcare in the United States. However, before jumping on to the Democrat bandwagon, Honeycutt drew a distinction between universal coverage and universal access. She made it clear that while she supports attempts by the government to encourage affordable coverage to uninsured Americans, she stopped short of saying that she supported government sponsored healthcare. One student in the audience, a pre-nursing major, seemed to take issue with her lack of support for universal healthcare or government sponsored coverage for all Americans. Dr. Honeycutt mentioned that while on a recent visit to Scotland, she met with a Scottish physicians to discuss healthcare issues. She was startled by a patient who dropped in on a physicians she was visiting. The doctor asked his patient about her gallbladder problem, to which she responded that she had already visited a doctor in another country and had that problem solved. Investigating the issue, Honeycutt reported finding out that many patients in nations that provide universal coverage often have to visit other places to have procedures done. This, according to Honeycutt, was simply the result of the long lines and waiting lists that confront patients in some of these nations. These comments drew more comments from students, particularly one who felt that many Americans also leave the U.S. to seek medical treatment because of poor choices and expensive healthcare here in the states. Honeycutt disagreed and pointed out that those who do so are doing so only for elective surgery and medical procedures. Not all the students were convinced her perception was accurate.

Honeycutt did not back down from her views. She told students that she felt universal healthcare would be quite costly for the American taxpayer and that citizens should not trust the government to manage their healthcare, at least not the same government that has mismanaged social security, made critical errors in providing medical care for veterans, and poorly managed and intervened negatively in public education. Some students agreed with Honeycutt, but for the most part, the audience to which Honeycutt spoke seemed to lean toward some sort of government-sponsored healthcare.

Perhaps Honeycutt and other small government champions should confront the issue in a number of different ways. First, candidates can ask voters if they feel that the government should provide us with health insurance. A friend of mine said he felt that this was a basic right that we have. "Afterall," he said, "how can one be happy if one is not healthy, and healthy, happy citizens have jobs and pay taxes, so everyone wins." While I have never wanted to justify anything because of its potential to increase the amount of taxes we pay to the government, it is an argument that holds sway with many people. Such voters often quote leaders like Franklin Delano Roosevelt who equated healthcare as a basic right. However, if that be the case, then we can make the argument as citizens that our government exists only to make us happy little campers rather than what our founders and enlightened thinkers throughout history have envisioned government's mission to be-protection of the natural rights that we have as humans and to defend us against forces seeking to abridge those rights. At that point, almost anything can be seen as part of our basic rights. Heck, there are a number of progressive liberals out there who even see the government as being responsible for our happiness. To see such an absurd idea in motion, check out Ryan Blitstein's article in Miller-McCune magazine entitled "Should the Government Make Us Happy?" Knox College psychology professor Tim Kasser has spent numerous hours researching what makes Americans happy and how the government can help us achieve that happiness. I guess we do not have a republic anymore; we have a nursery school. Taking the healthcare as a right argument to its logical conclusion, then cell phones, transportation, internet access, clothing, and cable will soon be seen as basic rights since the argument can be made that these things are vital for good citizenship. Will there be proposals to subsidize cell phone usage now? What about a bill to provide universal internet access? This argument could lead to total government intervention and support. Watch out taxpayers.

Another angle that these politicians can take is debunking the myth that there is a healthcare crisis in this nation. For evidence that there is no real crisis, one need only turn to Conrad F. Meier's article in Heartland Perspectives called "The Poor Do Not Lack Access to Health Care." In this article, Meier sheds light on how the United States Census Bureau collects information on the number of people without access to healthcare. In this report, he mentions that even the Census Bureau revealed that the number they often cite as the number of Americans without healthcare (45 million) is probably not a reliable number because they are really not equipped to collect data on the uninsured. Furthermore, Meier points out that 15 million of these people ARE eligible for Medicaid or S-CHIP, but have yet to enroll because they have not needed healthcare at this time. However, by the system's methods, when a person who is eligible for these programs do seek medical treatment, he is automatically enrolled. So, there are about 15 million people out there who are included in the ranks of the uninsured but do qualify for already existing coverage and will get it when the need arises.

In addition to these 15 million, Meier argues that there are 9 million documented and undocumented aliens included in this number, further skewing the whole picture. In addition, to these, other experts argue that there are about 3.5 million Americans who do not have health insurance but have incomes of 75,000 or more and prefer not to seek health coverage. These experts cite a 1998 Census Bureau report for evidence of these figures. They say this number has not changed much since 1998. Combining undocumented/documented aliens, those who are eligible for Medicaid but not enrolled, and those who can afford coverage but elect not to buy it, gives us a grand total of 27.5 million people. Add another 2 million uninsured who are college students and recent grads who do not wish to buy insurance and spend their money on other things they deem necessary such as housing, clothing, recreation, and cars, the number now becomes 29.5 million Americans. That leaves 15.5 million uncovered. That number represents around 5 percent of the nation. The unemployment rate is higher than this. So, I would imagine that it would be fair to say that THERE IS NO REAL HEALTH INSURANCE CRISIS IN THIS COUNTRY. But Democrats and liberals have pandered on this issue so long, and their friends in the mainstream media has been such a willing set of accomplices, the nation is now convinced that we have an impending crisis on our hands in this respect and that nothing less than complete economic collapse will result if we do not confiscate more of the taxpayer's money and put it in to a Socialist universal healthcare program run by an inefficient government who will not care about patient health as much as keeping the system running. Trust me Libertarians and conservatives, if you keep telling the truth about the mythical crisis Democrats have created, the average voter might listen and let it sink in.