10/30/2013 07:47 pm ET Updated Dec 30, 2013

The Moral Core of the Current Health Care Debate

The problem at the core of the Affordable Care Act isn't a set of computer glitches more or less predictable given its rush-to-market. The crux of the issue isn't even the fallout of the needless complexity Mr. Obama's hybrid government/private insurer compromise the model itself engenders, such as far less real competition (and therefore cost-cutting) in less populous, largely rural states than in larger, more peopled ones. And while I welcomed the ACA (and still do given the past, nearly exclusively avarice-driven private insurer health-care monopoly) I've no doubt that Mrs. Clinton's preferred paradigm -- for brevity's sake call it single-payer/Medicare-for-All -- will, one day, be realized.

The core problem in American health care isn't digital or structural, and it isn't demographic. It's moral.

For when you strip the contingencies of the moment from the deliberately far-too-heated greed-based debate, the unavoidable question remains:

Do we regard and are we better off regarding affordable health care, and particularly for the least among us, as a fundamental moral right?

No series of glitches, no phony outrage over those snafus from bought-off congressional shills for a rapacious medical industry, shills whom we long-since have known have never wanted any shred of a communitarian model ever to exist here, none of it should allow you to forget for a second the stripped-down debate core: Is affordable health care a basic right of citizenship?

I know Justice's answer and so do you.