Intellectually Dishonest Criticism

I get that there are legitimate concerns people have regarding transitioning America's healthcare system to a single-payer system (i.e. "Socialized Medicine"). However, in keeping with my previous points (repeated, seemingly, ad nauseum), if your concerns are so legitimate, you don't need to lie about them.

Today's example comes from the FoxNews of newspapers, the New York Post. Titled in such a manner as to scream "no agenda here," the post is called, "How BernieCare slams working people." Skeptic of the New York Post that I am, I decided to read it and see what their argument was. Here is the nut of the argument:

BernieCare guarantees you hospital care, doctors’ visits, dental and vision care, mental health and even long-term care, all courtesy of Uncle Sam. Amazing, right? But read the fine print. You’ll get care only if it’s “medically necessary” and “appropriate.” Government bureaucrats will decide, and they’ll be under pressure to cut spending.

Good point. The only thing missing from the article is any acknowledgement whatsoever that this practice already goes on in the private insurance industry. It's called "medical underwriting" and "claims management." If whatever treatments your doctor prescribes are deemed "not medically necessary" by your insurance company, then your insurance company won't pay for the care.

I read this criticism to be a defense of the present situation. However, if I criticize a proposed change for doing precisely what the present situation does, what is my criticism all about? It remains a mystery.