So my pals at the DNC called me today to help pay for their advertising up-tick to promote their health care reform bill and to negate all the evil coming from Emporer Limbaugh, Darth Hannity, Sith Witch Coulter and the rest of the Republic. While I do want to see a health care reform bill get passed this year, I am on the fence as to what it should look like. Why, you ask? Aren’t I a bra-burning liberal?? Well, yes, on most issues, especially social issues. But on this particular issue I have a very close-to-home conflict of interest. I work for one of the biggest insurance companies in the country.*
So… depending on the bill that actually gets through, I could potentially be out of a job. And with 4 kids to feed I have to step back and really scrutinize what’s trying to be accomplished. That said, I would still like to see a national health care system but I think there should be a private offering as well. How would that work? Well, we have it in place already really. Medicare and Medical Assistance are available to seniors and families with children, respectively, when they don’t have the means to provide for their own health care. Now I think that these offerings would have to be tweaked a bit and made better overall but the base is there to start from. The big change would be opening those programs up to a bigger population with less restrictive requirements (i.e. income, age, family, etc).
Then leave the private insurance in place — they will have to become competitive financially and where benefits are concerned to keep the cash flowing. So, someone like me, with 4 kids, now has an option. I can stick with my private, employer-based insurance or I can opt-out and go with the federal insurance plan. Or maybe I can stay with my company’s insurance and just get pharmacy bennies from the fed since mine suck. Or any number of combinations of the two options that work fiscally and are best for the health of my family. I think that people in general want better health care, I think they also want choices. I think that our government can do both. So, as I told the nice gentleman from the DNC today… I won’t be donating until I see a better defined and what I think is a helpful plan put out to the public for review. So if they want my donation they will need to step it up a notch.
Interestingly enough, right after that phone call I saw the following message from Herb Kohl (D-WI):
Over the past several months, people in Washington have been working to carefully craft a health care reform package. Though progress has been steady, there are still several proposals in flux. Please be aware that neither the House nor the Senate has formulated one bill, and that no final decisions have been made about what will be included in health reform.
Most of us agree that reforming and improving our health care system is necessary, and we cannot afford to wait another 10 or 20 years until health care costs consume an even greater percentage of the economy and the budgets of American families.
Consider this: The United States spends $7,290 on health care per person, per year – while the average spent by the 30 most developed countries is $2,960. It is unacceptable that we have so much more of our money tied up in health care, yet we are not delivering demonstrably better health care than many of these countries. Studies show that the U.S. ranks below average on major health indicators, including infant mortality and life expectancy, when compared with the rest of the world.
We currently rank 44th in infant mortality and 30th in life expectancy, with the average American living to 78 years of age. By comparison, Japan spends $2,550 on health care per person each year – just over a third of what the U.S. spends – and boasts a life expectancy of 83 years.
There is no doubt that American health care is breaking the bank and making us less competitive in the world economy. Money that should be going to wage increases and helping to make our businesses more competitive is instead going to pay for increases in health care costs. This will not change until we get a handle on those costs.
Controlling costs is a goal we can all support in principle, especially when other countries have demonstrated that quality health care can be delivered at a much lower cost. We can start controlling costs by paying for value of care, not volume, and eliminating duplicative testing and over-treatment. If we can do that, then our health care system – and America’s patients – will be in better shape. We need to ensure that all health care systems provide better care in a more efficient way, and reward those systems that already do so, such as the ones we have in several locations in Wisconsin.
America’s health systems should expand the use of health information technology, which has been shown to save lives by reducing medical errors and save money by promoting efficiency in testing and communication. We can support the use of generic drugs and get generic equivalents on the market faster. And we can encourage Americans to engage in preventive care and healthy lifestyles.
Many of these money-saving ideas are not controversial. The fact is that there is a lot that we can all agree on. We agree that we need to expand coverage to most, if not all, Americans. We also agree that people should not be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions. The principles we agree on far outnumber those on which we differ.
In addition to saving costs, health reform can do so much good for the average American. We want to limit your out-of-pocket expenses and co-pays. We want to make sure your coverage is not dropped just when you get sick and need it most. We want to eliminate caps on coverage, offer free preventive care and protect small businesses from the crushing costs of health care.
Despite all these positive changes that will benefit individual Americans, the debate surrounding health care threatens to get out of hand. False reports about what will be included in health care reform have taken on a life of their own. We need to strip away the rhetoric and dispel some of these rumors, many of which are meant to scare older Americans.
The most important thing for seniors to know is that health care reform will not diminish Medicare, the health care program those 65 and older have come to value. As we all know, Medicare provides older Americans with quality health care at a cost that is affordable.
Seniors are happy with Medicare. In fact, Medicare, a government-run program, boasts a satisfaction rate even higher than private insurance. The reform proposals to date are intended to strengthen Medicare, and will not make any significant changes to the way seniors receive their health care services.
As for the rumors out there about how health care will be drastically changed for the worse, you can rest assured: Health care reform will not limit choices, take away treatment options, ration care, eliminate private insurance, or tell you how or when to die. These things are not going to happen.
In the meantime, we hear you. We hear your needs and we hear your concerns. Your perspectives are invaluable, and we will continue to keep American families in mind as we work to complete a health reform package that starts to get costs under control, continues to provide high quality care, and begins to expand coverage to include most, if not all, Americans.
I tend to agree (he says it much better than I). I especially like the part about the cost-benefit between America and other countries. Really opens an eye. The fact is, we are not going to lose choices, have reduced care or increased waits for care. And while I don’t necessarily promote Michael Moore, Sicko made a few valid points; though I obviously don’t agree with him that all insurance companies should be abolished*. If I can choose between putting $400+ per month into my company’s insurance plan or in taxes to a federal plan that probably has better benefits… well it seems like a no brainer, doesn’t it??
Anyhoo… that’s my two-cents. Thanks for listening, we now return you to your regularly scheduled program.