McCain Health Care Proposal Would Exclude U.S. Residents With Pre-Existing Medical Conditions, Elizabeth Edwards Says

Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential candidate and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), on Saturday said that the health care proposal announced by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) would not provide health insurance for U.S. residents with pre-existing medical conditions, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Under the McCain proposal, health insurers "wouldn't have to cover pre-existing conditions like melanoma and breast cancer," Elizabeth Edwards said at the annual meeting of the Association of Health Care Journalists in Arlington, Va. Elizabeth Edwards, who has breast cancer that has spread to her bones, said that, under the McCain proposal, health insurers could deny coverage to both her and McCain, who has received treatment for melanoma. Democratic candidates Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.) both have announced health care proposals that would require health insurers to accept all applicants, regardless of pre-existing medical conditions.

In addition, according to Elizabeth Edwards, a provision in the McCain proposal that would allow residents to purchase health insurance across state lines would allow companies to shift operations to states with weaker consumer protection laws. McCain has said that the provision would increase competition among health insurers and reduce costs. However, Elizabeth Edwards said, "Hard-fought state-by-state protections would be lost" under the provision. She added, "They mask this proposal as a cost-saving technique. This is giving insurance companies a pass."

McCain senior policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said that the comments from Elizabeth Edwards indicate she does not understand the McCain proposal. Holtz-Eakin said that the McCain proposal would "harness the power of competition to produce greater coverage for Americans" and reduce costs.

Elizabeth Edwards also said that the requirement in the Clinton proposal that all residents obtain health insurance "is a great plan." She added, "Until we get rid of the need for hospitals and other providers to cover the costs of people who are not covered ... the overall cost is not going to go down. The only real cost savings comes when you have universality" (Lin, Los Angeles Times, 3/30).

Kaisernetwork.org webcasts of Edwards' speech and other sessions from the Association of Health Care Journalists conference are available online.

Editorial

• Richmond Times-Dispatch: The annual report released last week by Medicare and Social Security trustees indicates that the next president will face "enormous challenges" with the finances of the programs, according to a Times-Dispatch editorial. During her campaign, Clinton has not acknowledged that the "combination of rising health care costs and the aging of 78 million baby boomers will require making hard choices and rationing care one of two ways: higher prices or bureaucratic edicts," the editorial states. Obama has proposed to "fix the reimbursement system, emphasize prevention and encourage people to lose weight" to "solve the Medicare dilemma," according to the editorial. The editorial adds that McCain has opposed a means test for Medicare. According to the editorial, although McCain "comes closest to offering straight talk on entitlements, none of the candidates seems willing to tell the public the blunt truth." The editorial states, "That is a recipe for disaster, which can be avoided only through a full-spectrum approach: cutting benefits, means-testing, raising taxes and contributions, and raising the retirement age" (Richmond Times-Dispatch, 3/31).

Opinion Pieces

• Bill Roy, Wichita Eagle: U.S. residents have spent "good effort" and "good money" to make "our inequitable and tattered health care system sustainable," but the "'system' per se is getting into deeper and deeper trouble because Americans refuse to see the elephant in the room -- the health insurance companies," former Rep. Roy (D-Kan.), a retired physician, writes in an Eagle opinion piece. He writes, "No country can long afford a health care system run by private health insurance companies," which "take 15% to 30% for their fees (and add 15% to the administrative costs of physicians and hospitals); refuse to insure the sick, disabled, chronically ill and elderly"; and "generally distort" the health care delivery system "for their own profit." However, Roy writes, health insurers are "necessary for a functioning capitalistic economy." He adds that "McCain offers essentially no change, just the old GOP sleight of hand with the tax code," and that Clinton and Obama "intend to nurse the health care system as it sinks into death by making more money available to be wasted." Roy writes, "Neither intends to go to something like Medicare for all (minus Medicare Advantage)," which would "cover everyone" and "control costs to the extent possible in the face of more effective and costly medical services" (Roy, Wichita Eagle, 3/30).
  
  
• Regina Herzlinger, Washington Post: The "big mistake" made by Clinton and Obama is their assumption that health care "affordability relies on government and big employers' continued involvement in deciding what kinds of products and services" health insurers can offer, Herzlinger, a Harvard Business School business administration professor and Manhattan Institute senior fellow, writes in a Post opinion piece. Herzlinger writes, "One-size-fits-all" health plans such as Medicare "drive away the innovators who could lower health care costs," and "Big Business fares no better than Big Government" in "embracing" innovation. However, she writes, "Clinton and Obama support continuation of this dysfunctional model." According to Herzlinger, the "best option" is to "turn health care purchasing over to the American people," and the next president should "end the employer tax deduction" and provide tax incentives for families to purchase private health insurance; "make even the sickest patients into true health care consumers by paying insurers more for sick patients"; and allow individuals with chronic diseases to "choose among competing private plans." She adds, "Only consumer-driven health care will give entrepreneurs the flexibility to fashion a wide variety of appealing plans and services while allowing consumers to choose the most cost-effective coverage for themselves" (Herzlinger, Washington Post, 3/29).