March 23, 2010
-
On Reform
As my regular readers know, I have an advanced degree in health administration. Therefore, I feel highly qualified to make this statement — our health care system is complicated. I’m sure you had no idea, right?!?
As the national debate on health care reform has dragged on and on and on and on, I have tried to stay engaged in and educated about the process. I admit that it was not easy to do and there were long periods of time when I lost the will to keep up with the latest news, rumors and protests.
Today, health care reform was signed into law. I do not think that the bill is perfect. But really, could it ever be? Perfection is a pretty subjective thing and even getting general agreement about anything Washington-related seems pretty impossible these days.
I find it interesting that the voices of doctors, hospital leaders and other health care providers have not been given much air time throughout this lengthy process. Doesn’t it mean something that the American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association both support this legislation? These are the professionals who see on a daily basis that our existing system is chronically ill. Too many people are without coverage and using hospital emergency rooms for their primary care. The burden to provide care to these people is falling on the shoulders of our providers. When these providers do what is right (and required) and care for these people, they must sacrifice putting resources into other areas — which means that even people who are properly insured are paying the price. This health care reform will help. It will not solve all of the problems and it is likely to cause new ones, but it will help.
I know first hand that access to health care brings out strong emotions in people — the sick and the healthy alike. However, the way that the so-called “Tea Party” protesters behaved themselves outside the Capitol building was atrocious. The fact that many Republican members of Congress didn’t behave much better is appalling. In an Op-Ed piece for the New York Times, Bob Herbert wrote this:
Some of the images from the run-up to Sunday’s landmark health care vote in the House of Representatives should be seared into the nation’s consciousness. We are so far, in so many ways, from being a class act.I couldn’t agree more.
I would like to hold my head up high and be proud of the progress that has been made in a field that holds personal importance to me. However, I find that some of the wind has been taken out of my sails by my embarrassment over the process it took to get there. Clearly this was a topic that deserved great debate and would surely not leave everyone happy in the end. But common decency in the chambers of our House of Representatives sure would have been nice.
Comments (7)
Eh, I don’t watch that stuff. Why get myself upset? People suck. I already knew that. Re: health care…I’m still working my way through it on the comprehension side. I would say the reason the AMA is for it is because it shouldn’t affect them too much in terms of getting paid. ”Insurance reform” is better for doctors than public option or full scale nationalized healthcare. I don’t understand how you can force people to buy “insurance” and force someone else to sell it to them even if they already have a health condition. That part doesn’t make much logical sense to me.
Amen. I believe the issue has been mislabeled from the start and should have been called “Health Insurance Reform” As for the asinine behavior the media broadcast to the world – Oy! I can only hope my son can get some insurance. Going to school and working he is not covered by my insurance anymore… last time he had to go to the doctor it set us back over $200. He is slowly paying us back but making minimum wage at BK with low hours it is a struggle…
Do you want health insurance companies to stop denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions? To stop dropping coverage or jacking up premiums when people get sick? To stop setting caps on the maximum amount they will pay for treatment of a serious illness?
Basically, requiring insurance companies to offer health care insurance to all applicants without denial or sky-high premiums based on pre-existing conditions requires that everyone purchase health insurance. The risk pool must be large to make such a model fiscally sound. Otherwise, everyone will wait until they get sick to buy health insurance. This is like buying life insurance when you know you are about to die!
And don’t kid yourself. Just because you exercise, eat right, etc. doesn’t mean that YOU can’t be among the sick or seriously injured in just a flash!
@redhairedgrrl - That’s weird. I read this exact same comment on someone else’s page. It made as little sense on that page too.
@ordinarybutloud - It makes perfect sense to me. You can’t require health insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions unless you also require mandatory participation by everyone.
@redhairedgrrl - it makes sense, in a vacuum. It doesn’t make sense as a comment to *this post* which is about the political process and never suggested we shouldn’t have mandatory participation by everyone.
@ordinarybutloud - I had the same reaction to this comment on this post. And was also wondering why this person was so worked up about the likelihood that “YOU” can be among the sick or seriously injured! Why, thanks for that vote of good health confidence!!!