Radio talk show hosts, such as Glenn Beck, argue that American health care is cutting edge precisely because of the reward and cost control system that privately-owned, publicly traded companies implement in the health care system. In fact, Mr. Beck argues, leaders from other countries come to the United States to get procedures they can’t in their home countries.

With Mr. Beck’s persuasive arguments about Health Care, as well as Mr. George Will’s obviously well-informed belief in the good of “market forces,” I propose that the United States seriously re-examine all responders to a 9-1-1 call. If we take for granted that the cost for a ride in an ambulance, treatment by medical professionals at a hospital, and medications to prevent relapses are all operating at peak efficiency – and that governmental oversight is generally inept – then it stands to reason that the other responders to 9-1-1 should also be a pay-as-you-go service.

For instance, that same 9-1-1 call summons police officers. Police departments all over this country suffer from manning shortages and cutbacks mandated by idiotic bureaucratic politicians who are only in the game to take power away from the people; perhaps it is time to re-institute a system of protection based upon the Health Insurance model. Middle class workers could have a “criminal insurance” plan offered at their place of employment which would offer such options as noise complaint coverage and expedited investigation of breaking and entries, to name just a few. The plan would allow customers to tailor the coverage they desire to the neighborhood they live in and exert complete control over the police department. Of course, in order to appease the left-leaning Liberals in society, there would be a recourse for action that would allow low income, non-participants in the plan to have their grievances heard, as well as fill out police reports, at the local “urgent response center.” These “URC”s would guarantee low income families, businesses, and organizations the right to lodge complaints and be serviced by new officers who are learning the tricks of the trade and how to deal with the public. Of course, much like the Health Care industry, this may result in higher-than-normal costs to the consumer which they could then take out loans to pay off.

Furthermore, it would discourage living in “blighted” areas where recurrent criminal activity could be grounds for disqualification of coverage due to “pre existing criminal history” of the area and thus create a more efficient, profitable method of law enforcement. By privatizing the enforcement of law, the cost to tax-paying individuals is reduced, politically-minded bureaucrats are shown the door, and the quality of coverage would be increased.

Another service summoned by the dialing of those three digits is the fire department. Until now, fire departments were subject to the same problems that police departments have long been subject to. Before big government encroached upon the livelihood of average Americans, fire brigades were an all-volunteer service, manned by the hearty and the brave who took it upon themselves to be guardians of the public good. A return to reliance upon one’s neighbors for protection in times of dire need might just be the trick to solving the systemic ineptitude of the current Big Brother-run departments throughout the country. Each community could contribute whatever it could afford to the prevention of fire. More affluent communities, of course, might benefit from cutting edge technologies such as respirators, fire engines, helicopters, and radios, but even less well-off communities would have some level of service. Buckets and ladders could be donated by private corporations who, in return for their support, might have their corporate logo emblazoned on the side. Some neighborhoods might, of course, be untenable for a not-for-profit entity and cause some residents to avoid living in tenement housing where fire is a constant threat to the wellbeing of society. Interestingly enough, these tenement housings and other high-risk fire areas will most likely be places of high crime as well, so abandonment of these areas might be in the public interest.

To contain the threat of fire and crime which may continue as irresponsible people continue to insist on living in such poverty, perhaps large fire-retardant barriers could be constructed to ensure the public safety of dues-paying, charity-donating citizenry. These “hazard containment devices” (or HCDs) could be provided by the largess of the corporate community which, again, would be allowed to emblazon their logo on the wall; free advertising for the corporations and high-tech security for the average citizen – it’s a win-win situation.

In closing, I must admit that Mr. Beck has certainly opened my eyes to the possibilities of a privately-funded United States of America. I imagine once word of privately-funded police and fire departments operating at peak efficiency gets around the international community, other world leaders will be clamoring to have their crimes investigated or their fires extinguished by the best system in the world. And what a boon to American culture and self-reliance! After all, as Mr. Beck clearly points out, health care is not a right. But neither is protection from fire or enforcement of laws. And before I am bombarded with a barrage of leftist-leaning Socialist rhetoric I challenge you, all of you, to show me a portion of the Constitution or an Amendment which guarantees the right to not die in a fire or to have the law paid for by a bloated, over-reaching federal government.