There is probably a good argument for the government not meddling in health care. But, I'm not sure that this Charles Krauthammer column makes it:
"Obama wants to be to universal health care what Lyndon Johnson was to Medicare. Obama has publicly abandoned his once-stated preference for a single-payer system as in Canada and Britain. But that is for practical reasons. In America, you can't get there from here directly.
Instead, Obama will create the middle step that will lead ultimately and inevitably to single-payer. The way to do it is to establish a reformed system that retains a private health-insurance sector but offers a new government-run plan (based on benefits open to members of Congress) so relatively attractive that people voluntarily move out of the private sector, thereby starving it. The ultimate result is a system of fully socialized medicine."
Krauthammer believes that socialized medicine is a bad thing that will weaken our dynamic society, and so forth. But his argument here seems to be that we can't let people choose between our system and the single-payer system because nobody in their right mind would choose our shitty system, and we'd be screwed! I think he has to do better than that.
I've actually had both American health insurance and a Canadian health card (at different times!), so I have some knowledge about this. The bottom line: both systems suck in different ways, and honestly a sort of dual system would be the best possible option. However, let me say that I greatly prefer the Canadian system, and have actually never met anyone else who has used both systems who doesn't prefer the Canadian system.