The wintry February air makes us all aware of our health with chills down our backs. It’s probably no coincidence that all of this talk about universal health care plans is taking place during this season. Not only are our bodies more susceptible, but so are our feelings toward the issue.

But with fear of getting frostbite, we must first take our gloves off and examine our contact with the matter before we truly go numb.

The plans are ubiquitous like an Iowa snowfall, but unlike snowflakes, they are not all unique. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., wants universal health care in six years for the nation. Gov. Chet Culver and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger want it for their states’ citizens this year.

The first and most obvious question should have been asked: What is universal health care? But it wasn’t.

Instead politicians have assumed that universal health care is everyone having monetary access to medical services – not, as the name would imply, that care, in all regards, be given to everyone’s health. It is easier for politicians to say they support “universal health care” rather than saying they’re for “everyone’s monetary access to medical services.”

The reality is that our current popular discourse is not concerned with universal health care.

Is the care for health universal in all regards? Certainly not, because some of the plans talked about – in Iowa, for instance – are depending on the continued unhealthy activities of smokers and an increased tax. The rhetoric of caring for health universally is self-defeating as we outlaw marijuana, cocaine and other drugs while depending on the tax income from cigarettes and alcohol.

Is the care for health universal and for everyone? Unfortunately not, because many within our prisons carry tuberculosis, hepatitis C and HIV, among other infections. They go untreated. As many as 1.5 million prisoners carrying contagious diseases are released each year, according to the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons.

We are not isolated from those in prison, so there’s no excuse for disparaging an inmate’s health care. The lack of treatment also goes alongside the well-known cliches of prison violence and rape that we turn a blind eye to because prisoners are “reaping what they sow.”

Our government’s lack of care for health is further evident in the tactics and responses of those entrusted to “protect and to serve.” In its 2006 report, Amnesty International reported 61 people died in the year from being struck by police tasers – many of whom were unarmed and posing no serious threat. The grant of legitimate use of force to those in blue translates into excessive use of force.

When health care is discussed, the matter is almost entirely about physical health. The simple, beginning question of “What type of health?” is hardly raised. Mental health must also occupy a large part of the debate.

If it did, we would see that our care for mental health is also lacking.

Again, the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons reports “350,000 prisoners have a serious mental illness.” Without proper care, many of these prisoners when released will carry their illness with them into society. The result is not only a lack of care for prisoners, but for the rest of society.

Similar disregard for mental health exists in other incarceration: mandatory school attendance laws. At least one actually universal part of supposed health care, these laws herd children into government-approved schools with few choices or alternatives.

The result is diminished and unrealized mental development. And sometimes this mass herding forces children into violent environments lamented most in the cliche of school shootings. The alternative to skipping school from violence? Punishment by law; a no-win situation.

The darkly humorous irony is that while Culver speaks of expanded health care, other state representatives are pushing for Iowa’s mandatory attendance age to be increased from age 16 to 18.

The wintry February air is chilly indeed; freezing, in fact. So if our politicians truly believe in universal health care, in all regards and for everyone, I dare them. I dare them to confront all the serious issues involved in the language they use when invoking “universal health care.” I triple dog dare them lest our tongues become frozen to the flag poles flying the flag of the country in which they serve us and our health.

– Theodore Wolff is a senior in technical communication from Newell.