More on Health Care Reform

Here are a small collection of health care reform news and opinions in the media this week:

Paul Krugman explains that the government is already involved in our health care.

Republicans continue to resist any form of national health insurance.

Is national health insurance really so Un-American?

Yahoo Finance tells us what freedoms we will lose with single-payer health insurance.

The best solution is to move to a let-freedom-ring regime of high deductibles, no community rating, no standard benefits, and cross-state shopping for bargains... [Seriously?]

American Health Care Reform from a British perspective.

Ads...warn of the dangers of 'socialised medicine' - the most riveting of them carry warnings from Britain and Canada about the dire consequences which will follow if the United States copies their government-funded systems...You would almost get the impression that the streets of those countries are piled high with the unburied dead...

CNN wraps up health care reform in a nutshell. That's it, we're done. We've been educated.

The cost of Health Care Reform (not in $)

There was an article in the NY Times today about what health industry groups are getting out of negotiations with the Obama administration. Wal-Mart supporting mandatory employer coverage? What are the costs of these deals?

This mess of a thing we call Health Care Reform

I have been meaning, for some time, to write about the status of health care reform in the US. After all, this is a blog mostly centered on health care issues and I am a health advocate, how can I not comment on such an issue like health care reform? (Ah but come on, my thoughts on the Twilight series are so relevant to the state of the world). But, it has been a daunting task. Everyday something new comes out in the news and honestly, I am not even sure where some people/entities stand on the issue sometimes. This post is in no way, an end all and be all of health care reform. Rather, it is meant to be a gathering of news and updates on the status of health care and who is doing what. Maybe eventually, we can all figure this out (and maybe even have access to affordable health care too, but that may be asking too much).

As much as I would like to meet this subject with an air of neutrality, I find it near impossible. I’ve seen and heard too much to be impartial. It’s very hard for me to find sympathy for wealthy people and industry who have held the power over our health care system for too long. I am not deluded enough to believe that a national system would be perfect all around. But, I cannot see health care as anything other than a right for all people, not just those who can afford it.

Let’s take a look at who some of the major players are in health care reform and where they stand.


The Obama Administration:
Obama assured us all in his 2008 presidential campaign that he would fight for universal health care coverage and that a combination national/private health care plan would be the best route for the U.S. This sounded great to many of us, although those of us who have paid attention to previous health care reform attempts (IE. The Clintons’ attempt in the 90’s) realized this would be an uphill battle.

Now that he’s in office and attempting to take on this beast in his first year, we see a mess of cost issues, industry influence and anti-national health insurance propaganda. My concern is that, now in office, will Obama bow to the pressure and his campaign promise will not be accomplished? Will he have to compromise to make even smaller changes, working toward gradual reform? We voted you in with hope, Obama. Please don’t let us down.

Congressional Democrats:
Democrats are mostly pushing for a combination national/private health care program. Now they have to show us the costs of such a program and where we can save money.

Congressional Republicans:

Republicans are fighting against any form of government run plan, even in combination with private insurance. They fear that employers will drop private insurance and force people into the government plan.

American Medical Association (aka Doomsday to any attempts at national health care):
The AMA hates public programs that reimburse doctors at a lower rate than private plans. They have fought all attempts at public health care programs and would like to see Medicare eliminated, as well as charitable care reduced. They claim that individuals should ultimately be responsible for their own health care.

Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP):
Not all doctors belong to the AMA. Some doctors are for a national health care program, PHNP is an example. It’s not as large or powerful as the AMA, but it’s good to know there are MDs fighting for a national system too. This particular organization proposes an expanded version of Medicare for all Americans.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA):
The biggest reason that the pharmaceutical industry would oppose a national insurance program would be the ability of a single insurance entity to negotiate cheaper drug costs. We have seen this fear played out with Medicare, and it will no doubt affect the industry’s support of a national health plan. There is also a fear of stricter government regulation over the industry.

The industry is sensitive to negative publicity however, and has recently increased its charity provisions in a few ways. First, drug companies have agreed to offer discounts to people with a Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage during the infamous Donut Hole, when beneficiaries must cover the full cost of their drugs. Second, Pfizer just started a program providing drug assistance for the newly unemployed.

Now, these programs are all well and good, but wouldn’t they be irrelevant if people had affordable access to prescriptions on a regular basis? Wouldn’t that save the companies money?

The Insurance Industry:
This is a no-brainer. The creation of a national health insurance program would hurt the private insurance industry. Why would the industry then support a public program? But, come on, it’s obvious to see the current state of health care is not working. Even those with health insurance coverage are filing for bankruptcy.

WARNING: The following is a rant about the stupidity of some people.

We’ve been hearing the argument that a government-run national health insurance program would be too bureaucratic; telling people what doctors they could see and making them jump through hoops to get coverage. Really?!?!?!?! REALLY? This is about the most hypocritical argument I’ve ever heard. Are these people really trying to suggest that people don’t face any of this crap with private insurance? Because I bet that argument would be washed away simply by talking to people who have private insurance, and especially if they have any kind of chronic illness! Anyone who believes this is fully delusional.

Anyway, enough of the ranting. If you want to learn more about health care reform or just keep up with health reform news, check out the Kaiser Family Foundation website. They even have a side-by-side comparison of health care reform proposals.

Amendments to Summer Reading List

My summer reading has begun and I have realized that a few changes to my initial list are in order.

I have already read both Twilight and Slaughterhouse Five. See my thoughts on Twilight below. Slaughterhouse Five was excellent and I highly recommend it to everyone. It's a great exploration of living in the moment and letting go of attachments, not to mention war.

Speaking of books about war, I happened to pick up the book, Johnny Got His Gun, from the bookstore recently. I was thinking I would just read it after my summer reading was through, but a friend wants to read it as well, so it has been moved up on my list. If you recall, I wrote a brief review about the 2008 film last fall. It was excellent and now I want to read the original work behind it.

I finished Twilight, and to my own chagrin, have become slightly obsessed with reading the series. I just finished the second book, New Moon, and am going back and forth about whether I should finish the series. When I read Twilight, the first book in the series, I told myself that it would be the only one I would read. That was, until I found myself at a bookstore, next book in hand. A young girl stared at me with big eyes from across the kiosk of Twilight books. "Are you reading the Twilight books?!?!?!". "I've only read the first, now I'm going to read the second one", I told her. She stared at me in disbelief. "I've read them all, three times! You should skip New Moon and read Breaking Dawn. It's the best one!" As she said this her mother rolled her eyes.

Here I am conflicted. It's great that kids are reading books, but I don't really like the message it sends to young girls. When reading the books myself, I am drawn into this overly dramatic, star-crossed love affair between Bella and Edward. But, when I'm not engrossed in the story, and think about the situation in a larger context, it really just sounds like an unhealthy teenage relationship. If I were Bella's parent or even friend, I certainly would be concerned about her being in an abusive relationship.

But even thinking all this, I will probably read the other books. I mean, you cannot just stop in the middle of the story. I have to know what happens in the end!

To make time for these additions (although I tend to finish the Twilight books rather quickly), I have decided to give up on The Baby Catcher. If I haven't finished it in 5 months, I need to be realistic and just let it go. Also, I may put off The Audacity of Hope until the fall. All other books on the list are still a go in my mind and I am looking forward to reading them.