To say the least, this past year in American politics has been exciting and controversial.  We have elected a black man to the presidency, blasted billions of dollars into ailing firms, and caused raucous debates in town halls. While the former two events are likewise important, the outcome of the current health care debate will have the most direct effect on all United States citizens. Health care reforms have the potential to better and worsen the quality of care for Americans across all socioeconomic levels.

The news of this past summer was flooded with health care legislation and negotiations between heavy-hitting senators. It was not rare to see daily editorials on health care. The American populace quickly became numb to health care updates. However, after months of debating this volatile topic, the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, bluntly stated in the Wall Street Journal that health care is not an inherent right of a human being. Specifically, Mackey likened health care to other luxuries that are desired but not guaranteed: 'Health care is a service that we all need, but like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food, or shelter.'

In the wake of this article was left the question: do Americans have an equal claim to good health care? In addition, should it be the government's responsibility to provide every citizen with adequate care, even for those who cannot afford it? Perhaps access to health care is simply an extravagance that comes with a decent salary and education. Those who work hard will reap the benefits. Those who are born into poorer, less-educated societies will have the opportunity to succeed while those who do not succeed will succumb to natural selection. Although this is an apathetic viewpoint, it does not contradict the dogma of the United States government. All citizens can speak, act, and write freely – but they are not assured health care.

After Mackey wrote this editorial on August 11, 2009, in the Wall Street Journal, he received furious backlash. Numerous Obama-supporters across the country began a boycott against Mackey's brainchild, Whole Foods. The supermarket mecca for wealthy liberals suddenly became a manifestation of conservative politics. As a result of Mackey's editorial, a simply expression of personal sentiment, Whole Foods has been stigmatized by many Americans.

While vilifying a supermarket is absurd, this action illustrates the current unease. After months of debate and frustration as medical legislation is continuously rewritten, Americans are worried. Quality of personal health is important. It has an immediate consequence on every citizen's life. The health of an individual dictates whether he can engage in society, generate a salary, enjoy life, and see grandchildren mature. While Obama's election and the economic bailout are visible, no one can live in the pursuit of happiness without good health.

Without a doubt, the United States needs health care reform. Medical treatment has become ridiculously costly from unnecessary examinations and inefficient practices. But universal health care is unfeasible. Instead of condemning Whole Foods, Mackey, and non-supporters of universal health care, the American government and populace should solely focus on a viable plan for health care reform. Reform is cost-effective and practical. It's time for Congress to debate a new issue.