America's Self-Defeating Attitude on Health Care Reform
With skyrocketing costs and 47 million Americans uninsured, it's obvious that health care has become a serious domestic crisis. President Obama made it a centerpiece of his campaign and has since moved to amend the moldering system. But before reform legislation can pass, Americans must realize what the biggest historical obstacle to universal health care has been: themselves.
There are two main types of universal health care opponents: a) special interests pursuing their own agendas and b) those who reject government activism on principle. The former will forever fight to preserve their power over the system, largely at the expense of the people. The latter ought to know that by encouraging their leaders to sit idly by, they're effectively digging their own graves.
A sea of Americans view government as innately flawed and incapable of improving their conditions. Many of these individuals, instead of voting for candidates interested in ameliorating their health care woes, elect those who believe government should stay out of their lives. And so the tide persists as a self-defeating, self-fulfilling prophecy.
The AMA, insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry have long battled national health care because it would weaken their stranglehold over the populace. On numerous occasions they've spent extraordinary sums of money to engulf attempts at reform -- be it during the progressive era in the early 1900s, Truman in the 1940s or Clinton-care in the 1990s. (They even fought Medicare and Medicaid tooth and nail in the 1960s.) But the alarming reality is that these monsters wield much of their power from the very people they consistently swindle and cheat.
In the '90s, insurance companies sank the Clinton Health Security Act by convincing Americans that it would curtail their menu of medical options. As a result, tens of millions ended up without a menu altogether, many of whom have since plunged into bankruptcy due to unbearable medical bills. A very similar episode occurred in the '40s under Harry Truman, with the AMA leading the charge. Both times, the ensuing anti-reform wave drowned the Democratic Party for its efforts to rescue the uninsured.
The virulent obstructionism and influence wielded by these special interests is disheartening, to say the least. But let's not forget how helpless they'll be once ordinary people stop buying into their propaganda and understand that they're being conned.
Anybody who wants to solve America's health care predicament must first reject the naysayers who dogmatically vilify government and glorify the private entities that have failed us. The current system encourages exclusion of those who need medical care the most, and only government has the power to restructure these incentives.
Remember also that there is no such thing as a free lunch, which some people are apparently holding out for. Poll a group of Americans and ask them whether they'd like to have a national, government-sponsored health care program; the answer is resoundingly positive. Then ask the same group whether they're willing to pay higher taxes to make it happen, and watch the number shrink (although both figures are gradually rising over time).
The tragedy is that an effective national program, despite the costs, would be more economically sound as it would minimize the enormous out-of-pocket expenditures millions are currently subject to. It would also encourage preventive medicine, thus saving many lives by catching illnesses early. The United States, with one in six uninsured, spends far more per capita on health care than countries like France and Canada, which manage to insure all their citizens. And contrary to popular myth, quality of care is no better here.
The good news is that the winds of today are blowing against the obstructionists. There is currently a deluge of populist determination to overhaul the health care system. But the necessary reforms will only succeed when Americans get serious and see through the nonsense that has allowed this broken system to persist.
So during the upcoming debate on health care reform, don't be swept away by sneering slogans like "socialized medicine" or harebrained ads comparing universal health care to the Russian Revolution. Remember whose interests the medical establishment and their partners in Congress have at heart. Demand that your government stand up for you. If you think your leaders can help you, you may well be right. If you think they can't, you'll definitely be right.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Google AMA and then find Patients' Action Network, and a whole slew of other headings. What the AMA is now espousing is a little different from what it was just a year or so ago.
I spoke to some rich people just last week. To my surprise they told me that the Republicans have messed up the U.S. and that Universal Healthcare is a necessity! It makes no difference in their healthcare at all. The difference for them is the value of their dollar, and the taxes they are paying for indigent care, whether it is foodstamps, Medicaid, whatever. They have come to the conclusion that it is cheaper to let people pay a premium for their own healthcare and then let them go to work as they are able. I heard something quite similar seventy years (almost) ago in first grade. Our teacher was nobility but used a common name. One kid had found out and we had a discussion about nobility, people belonging to a landowner, etc. It was explained very simply: first there were only a few, but as the years continued there were too many to take care of. The Noble Lady was now for Democracy and human rights. It was much easier and also cheaper.
The AMA has changed its stance a little lately. They have their own Agenda, of course, but the last two decades have been difficult for doctors and the AMA. HMO's proved not to be working and to infringe upon physicians' patient/doctor relationships and autonomy. Medicare Advantage programs receive direct funds out of Medicare as well as patients' insurance premiums, but it does not do anything to improve payments to doctors, on the contrary. Medicare reimbursements have been cut so low that it has become impossible for a Medicare patient to find a doctor. That, of course, is both a physicians' tactic as it is a problem for the patient, but the end result will be that it will accelerate universal healthcare. I believe medical reimbursement fee schedules have not improved since the early 90's, while all other costs have gone up. Even the AMA will see, or has already seen, that the convoluted system costs doctors time and money, that there are too many intermediaries who prey upon and get patients' medical dollar instead of the doctor and other caregivers. Systemchange, higher efficiencies will help doctors too. Premiums paid for healthcare is not taxation. But t does not matter what one calls it, it is an outflow for patients, who want it as low as possible, and who want to get what they pay for, i.e. healthcare at a fair price.
Just as there are Americans who vote (inexplicably) against their own economic interests, so there are thse who vote (inexplicably) against their own health interests.
My husband and I spend almost $14,000. a year for health insurance and it goes up EVERY year! And, quite frankly, I feel "uninsured". I have to fight for name brand perscriptions if the generic have to many side effects, have to see what ever doctor is avialable, which is usually not the doctor I have selected as my personal choice and that's usually a two day or more wait. AND, Blue Shield just stopped accepting our local hospital for "approved" care and have assigned us to a hospital 15 to 20 minutes away, that I might add, has a less than stellar reputation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg......SO quite frankly, how can it get too much worse, with a one payer system. It's just unconsionable to have the system we have with so many under insured or with no insurance. And what about the millions now unemployed, they sure can't afford COBRA, which is outragously expensive. I bet the 47 million with no inusurance has grown enormously over the last several months.
So, better hope your not having a heart attack. So far we don't have any major health issues, for now......................In the richest country in the world, with the most advanced medical equipment and largest teaching hospitals, how did we get to where we are. Medical care for PROFIT .........how obscene.
I am not surprised at what you are paying, irishgramm. Nor am I surprised about your experiences with Insurers. I was insured with Blue Cross Blue Shield from before I even set foot on American soil until after I was cancelled by them. They never paid one penny for my care, nor did I ever file a claim. I was cancelled because I had surgery which I paid for out of pocket (preexisting condition). Then I could not get other insurance, and because of that, no regular employment either. Just parttime jobs with multiple university degrees. And what would you call the almost $ 14,000.--/yr? An insurance premium? What if you had to pay, instead, $ 120.--/mo for universal healthcare? Would it make a difference whether or not you called it a tax or an insurance premium? Would the difference in what goes out of your income yearly make a difference? Any preferences? The unemployed, irishgramm, can not pay insurance premiums, they may get Medicaid for their children under 18. Some I know have also been homeless for a long time now. they stay with friends and relatives, a few days here, a few days there, if they are lucky.
I have been fortunate enough to always have a job in my 12 years of working a professional job since graduating from college. I am for health care for all. I will make the phone calls and canvas to make sure that people get health care coverage. We can treat this like we did the 2008 Election. WE WILL NOT let those liars (i.e. rethugliKKKans) who are against EVERYTHING that will help the working class deter us from getting health care for all. Switzerland in the 90's fought this and now they are HAPPY, HAPPY!!!! AMERICANS SHOULD HAVE HEALTH CARE. I SAY, NO ELECTED OFFICIAL should continue to get the great health care benefits we pay for unless or until we the people who elected them get the same privilege. THEY WORK FOR US, we the people are the CEOs and I have yet to hear of a CEO that makes less and have less then the people that works for him. We should march on Washington and DEMAND health care for ALL. This is a worthy cause that will in the long run save our country BILLIONS
America never get the facts because we have lost the art of reading and listening; then, we lost our patience for strategic planning and negotiation. All of these components will be needed to pass Healthcare, Education, and Energy reform, therefore, the article is very timely and true
What most Americans don't know about heath care is...If it wasn't for the Republicans sense the Nixon administration, we wouldn't be having the problems we are having now with health care. The system was Hijacked by Kaiser Permanente in the early 70's...Health care for profit is not working in America because the ass holes at the top of the heath insurance business are out of control greedy. Our elected officials should be ashamed of them selves for letting this happen too hard working Americans. It's a sad day in America when people are dieing every day because they have no health care insurance but, the CEO of United Heath Care, (The biggest HMO in America) got a exit bonus of $1.89 Billion dollars. The CEO of Kaiser make 1.7 Billion dollars last year. No wonder people in this country are dieing because of lack of hearth care. How many claims did United have to deny to buy his $800 million dollar ocean going boat. We are doomed because we have to many ass holes in this country that don't want to share the wealth. Well, guess wants coming after the people get sick of trying to feed there kids and can't? Do any of you Republican understand what starts Revolutions?
I'm not a Republican but I will happily answer you...
This is going to sound heartless coming from a woman with 12 kids that she's responsible for (NO I didn't give birth to them all, I'm raising biological children, adopted children, step children and nephews )... being RESPONSIBLE means that we assess our ability to support children prior to engaging in sexual activity. IF one is not prepared financially to support a child EVERY time that one engages in sexual activity one should NOT be engaging in it.
There are many things that lead to revolution... The problem is that it is usually people too stupid to grasp that they got themselves into the mess they are in that are calling for it. The Founding Fathers chose to revolt over many things including Taxation without Representation... guess what TODAY the same situation is going on in the US as was going on in the 1770s when the Founding Fathers got fed up.
The other self-destructive myth of American Health Care is that we can't afford a good health care system. The real answer is that the US spends a far greater share of our GDP than any other developed country on health care. We even spend a bigger share of our government spending than most countries, yet we have far worse health statitsics.
America spends too much on crisis care and not enough on routine, diagnostic, and preventative care. Every comparative study of heath care between countries agrees on it. And it is principally 'managed care' to blame. Doctors for example usually in the US see diabetes cases far farther along when there is nothing to do but drastic actions. The problem is that in the US adults in the 45-65 age range are scared to see doctors for a minor problem even if they are insured because they are afraid that they will get judged with a 'pre-existing condition', dropped by their coverage, lose their jobs because they will be seen as a risk and then be uninsurable by anybody else and be bankrupted if the problem gets worse. The 'managed care' folks like it that way because the undiagnosed problem in the 45-65 age range may not become critical until after 65 at which point the problem is the government's (medicare).
You got it! And they propagate the idea that the unemployed do not wish to work!! To get an appointment with a doctor for diabetes or similar illness may take up to a year! However, if you are a Medicare patient, or a Medicaid patient, you might be able to get the best doctors at an University Clinic. They MUST take those patients. With Universal Healthcare you will also be seen, as patients can not be denied care, or employment for that matter. Even if a patients' medical problem is diagnosed before age 65, a doctor might not be able/willing to refer that patient for care under insurance; insurers will not take them, and as you state, will drop insurance. Then the doctor can not treat the patient for other illness either, unless the patient pays out of pocket. And after we get Universal Healthcare we should also get treaties on Medical Care, just as we have treaties on social security with other nations.
"Many of these individuals, instead of voting for candidates interested in ameliorating their health care woes, elect those who believe government should stay out of their lives."
Not true. They elect mostly Repubs or Dems the great majority of the time and--
Repubs want plenty of government power, to gerrymander, to halt abortion, to make Terry Schiavo laws - They also like to corrupt the government by making it religious, by finagling the judges and the justice department, as well as cheating at the ballot boxes.
There are a couple of other groups that are sitting back saying "WHOA, slow this wagon down a little before you drive us all over a cliff".
Those of us who have LIVED in countries with National Health Care are only too intimately acquainted with the failings OF National Health care. Failings that "progressives" DENY the existence of to start with. You cannot ADDRESS failings that you refuse to admit exist. Making that particular denial worse is that EVERY time that someone points out the failings "progressives" accuse the person of being a "shill" for the insurance companies. The REALITY is that IF you want to craft a QUALITY product for ALL Americans then you NEED to address not only the failings of our own medical system but ALSO the failings of EVERY National Health System that you want to base ours on. Otherwise you are merely repeating other people's mistakes and DAMM if that doesn't sound like the very definition of insanity.
Another group that has SERIOUS concerns are people who are disabled. Why are the disabled concerned? Because ALL that ANY of you want to talk about is COST! You are NOT discussing improving actual CARE... you keep repeating the mantra "if it costs less you will be better off" BUT fail miserably to name one single change in CARE... It is ALL about COST and NOT addressing the medical needs of almost 20% of the US population may well cost you passage of health CARE reform.
Maybe, just maybe if we shout loud enough, we can help change the mantra? Lord knows I have my soapbox and megaphone, and Im not gonna let anyone tell me to "sit down and shut up" just because my perspective is a minority perspective. We must fight to have every voice heard, every perspective listened to, and every point of view considered. And we must insist that our views and opinions are respected, or those who are doing the majority fighting will lose all credibillity
How about we start from apoint upon which we can all agree?
Life is an absolute right.
Absence of health is death.
Hence there is a continuum, called being alive, which has at one end illness approaching death and at the other, complete freedom from discomfort and disease.
If life is an absolute right, then health is an absolute right. Not necessarily perfect health, just as no one is guaranteed a perfect life, but health.
Then get down to the business of how to guarantee this right for all. I submit that it cannot be achieved if the only way to get health care for the vast majority of Americans is within a system which guarantees a profit to non-providers. If we are ever to achieve it, insurance companies have to be extracted from the equation - gradually or suddenly. But they must be removed. Care is expensive, resources are scarce, and EVERY PENNY paid to non-medical staff is money lost, never to be recovered.
And the main problems that I am trying to discuss is the fact that most people are concerned with one end of the spectrum or the other, with only minimal regard to those caught in the middle, who do not have complete freedom from discomfort and disease, but are not necessarily concerned about illness and impending death. There are those of us with chronic long term, life long disabilties with no cure, and the prevention of which is foo late for many of us.
Not to mention the fact that the delivery system itself is in complete disarray when we are given medication and treatments to solve or reduce symptoms in one area that cause worse symptoms in other areas which only force us to undertake more treatment or medication, and the entire process becomes a snowball of medication on top of medication on top of medication, all because nobody thought to consider that the FDA is approving drugs that only later are deemed harmful or fatal
"Life is an absolute right"
Ahhhhhhh but Life is NOT a right, be it "absolute" or not. Furthermore the absence of life is death NOT the absence of health.
You are still only discussing COST...
Let me know when people are willing to have an HONEST discussion regarding CARE.
We need single payer health care with public management and private delivery. A majority of the American people want it and a majority of doctors want it yet it is being left out of the discussion in Washington. If you would like to let your elected officials know that you want single payer please join our single payer voting bloc at:
http://www.votingbloc.org/Health_Bloc.php
They may be able to ignore our letters and petitions but they cannot ignore our votes!!! If we stand together on this issue we can make it happen.
The people who are outside the insurance industry and are against single pay universal health care are either delusional, ignorant, st.up.id, or a combination of the three. Even if I was to relinquish the tax deferred wages towards my health insurance to be taxed in addition to an additional 10% on my total gross income, I would STILL come out FAR better in terms of what I am paying now.
Our premium is now $1531 a month. Does anyone think that my taxes will go up that much?? I doubt it.
Do I believe the system needs reformed? Absolutely. But, that isnt going to stop me from advocatng what I believe to be the proper reform. And, right now, as a disabled and terminally ill person, the right reform is to improve the quality of care we receive, before we even begin to talk about how much it costs. Comparative Effectiveness and EMR are a good start, but they are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to true improvement of quality of care. We need to put more emphasis on the BigPharma/FDA symbiotic relationship, and absolutely stop the FDA from approving costly drugs that end up being more harmful than their intended purpose to heal us. Why go on a medication for a heart condition when that medication can lead to liver and/or kidney damage in someone who can not simply receive a kidney or liver transplant, because their organs are paralyzed due to a congenital disabiliity, which would end up compromising the function of the new organs just as much as the old organs? Until we improve the quality of care in this country, it doesn't matter one lick what people are going to pay, because they're paying to be murdered by neglect from the FDA/BigPharma
I am all for Public Healthcare for everyone except SMOKERS and DRUG ADDICTS. I say drug tests very birthday, if you fail no health coverage for a year. Think about how healthy we would be...
So would you test them for the same drugs Big Pharma is pushing, or just the ones you think are unhealthy?
Your stance is that a thinned herd is a healthy herd. In other words, a type of eugenics (the kind of racial philosophy favored by the Nazie - look it up).
It's true no one should be smoking, and no one should be taking addictive drugs (except for a firmly limited time under medical supervision). But the solution to addiction is not to just let them die. It is to treat the addiction - yes, even with public money.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
