Opinion Piece, Letters to the Editor Discuss Health Care Issues in Presidential Election

Elizabeth Edwards, wife of former Democratic presidential candidate and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), last week "bluntly pointed out" that neither she, who has cancer, nor presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), who has had cancer in the past, could obtain health insurance under the health care proposal he has offered, a statement that highlights the problems with the plan, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman writes. The proposal would not require health insurers to accept applicants with pre-existing medical conditions, Krugman writes, adding, "It's about time someone ... made the case that Mr. McCain's approach to health care is based on voodoo economics" -- the "foolish claim" that the "magic of the marketplace can produce cheap health care for everyone."

In response to the comments from Elizabeth Edwards, the McCain campaign said that the proposal would use the "power of competition to produce greater coverage for Americans" through a reduction in costs that would make health insurance affordable for residents with pre-existing medical conditions, Krugman writes. However, according to Krugman, such a claim is "nonsense on multiple levels" because, "even if you buy the premise that competition would reduce health care costs," the "idea that it could cut costs enough to make insurance affordable for Americans with a history of cancer or other major diseases" is "sheer fantasy."

Meanwhile, although McCain is "offering a completely wrongheaded approach" to health care, the "way the campaign for the Democratic nomination has unfolded" raises "questions about how effective his eventual opponent will be in making that point," Krugman writes. Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has criticized a requirement that all residents obtain health insurance included in the health care proposal opponent Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) has offered, "using conservative talking points about the evil of having the government tell you what to do," Krugman writes. He adds that such criticism will "make it hard" for Obama, in the event that he becomes the Democratic nominee, to "refute McCain when he makes similar arguments." Krugman also notes that while Elizabeth Edwards "focused her criticism" on McCain, she said she prefers Clinton's approach to Obama's. According to Krugman, Clinton's plan "closely resembles" the approach John Edwards proposed, while Obama has laid out a "watered-down plan that falls short of universality" (Krugman, New York Times, 4/4).

Letters to the Editor
USA Today on Friday published several letters to the editor written in response to a March 26 article that examined the positions of the candidates on health care. Summaries of two of the letters appear below.

• Linda Lawrence: A "vital component is missing from the debate" over health care in the presidential campaign: "how to solve the crisis that exists in America's emergency departments as a result of our broken health care system," Lawrence, president of the American College of Emergency Physicians, writes. According to Lawrence, "patients -- insured and uninsured -- are suffering and dying as a result of emergency department overcrowding," and the "problem" will not "be solved by simply providing everyone with health care coverage." EDs, the "safety net in the health care system," are "too overwhelmed by too many patients and are closing in unprecedented numbers as a result," Lawrence writes. She adds, "What America needs to know" is how the candidates "propose to address overcrowding and its related issues" and "how the candidates will tackle the lack of reimbursement from the government for care provided." She concludes, "As the health care reform debate continues, let's hope" that the candidates will "expand their proposals to include how to resuscitate emergency care before it's too late" (Lawrence, USA Today, 4/4).
  
  
• David Sundwall: The article was "informative and provocative" but "left one feeling that none of the candidates has a plan that would prevent an implosion" of the health system, Association for State and Territorial Health Officials President Sundwall writes. He writes, "Regardless of which candidate prevails," none seems to have considered that the U.S. "must reduce the need for costly health care by preventing illness and disease in the first place ... through effective public health systems and preventive medicine." According to Sundwall, the U.S. does not "spend enough of its health care dollars on public health programs and activities," and that "imbalance must be corrected." He concludes that, by "strengthening and increasing our investment in public health," the U.S. could "moderate the growth of health care spending while maintaining our economic competitiveness and quality of life" (Sundwall, USA Today, 4/4).