Editorials, Opinion Pieces, Letter to the Editor Discuss Issues Related to Health Care Reform

Summaries of several recent editorials, opinion pieces and a letter to the editor that address issues related to health care reform appear below.

Editorials

• Austin American-Statesman: America's Health Insurance Plans last week announced a proposal that seeks to reduce health care costs and use the savings to expand health insurance to all U.S. residents, and "insurers are right to put a spotlight on the need to get a grip on those rising costs and not just extend coverage to the uncovered," an American-Statesman editorial states. According to the editorial, "insurers are not acting out of a sudden burst of compassion; they know that President-elect Barack Obama intends to make broadening health insurance coverage a major priority, and a Democratic Congress is likely to take action of some kind in 2009." The editorial concludes, "It looks like the nation, including the insurers, are finally going to move beyond talking about this national problem" (Austin American-Statesman, 12/8).
  
  
• Boston Globe: "Taxing the health insurance benefit that many workers get from their employers would do harm, lots of it," because the move "could undermine employer-based insurance, which still covers 60% of Americans," a Globe editorial states. According to the editorial, the health care proposal recently announced by Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.) includes a "new tax as a source of funds" to expand health insurance to more residents. The editorial concludes, "Health care reform will require give and take from all sides," but "it should not begin with a new tax that voters could rightly think they put to rest when they voted for Obama" in November (Boston Globe, 12/8).
  
  
• Miami Herald: "Anyone who doesn't believe that the nation's health care system has become a dysfunctional mess should read" the 2008 America's Health Rankings report issued last week by the American Public Health Association, the Partnership for Prevention and the United Health Foundation, a Herald editorial states. The report found that the "health of Americans has failed to improve for the fourth straight year," the editorial states, adding, "As long as we keep doing what we're doing as a nation, the outlook is bleak and the prognosis is grim." The editorial states, "Given the severe economic times, it's a sure bet that these harsh findings will get worse" as more residents lose their jobs and health insurance, and that "should be reason enough to convince Congress and the incoming administration that the health care system desperately needs an overhaul" (Miami Herald, 12/7).
  
  
• Rochester Democrat and Chronicle: Obama "will take office next month and he must follow through and make health care reform among his top priorities," a Democrat and Chronicle editorial states. "True, Obama has his hands full with the nation's economic challenges," but "it doesn't take a health care policy wonk to recognize that reform can contribute to faster-than-usual economic recovery," according to the editorial. The editorial states, "Some facets of health care reform ought to be a given -- expanding insurance coverage, bringing down costs and improving quality," adding, "How to get there, though, is the challenge" (Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, 12/8).
  
  
• St. Petersburg Times: A "Republican-led Congress increased payments" to Medicare Advantage plan providers in 2003, and since that time, "billions of dollars have been directed into private sector profits that could have been spent on direct care for Medicare beneficiaries," a Times editorial states. According to the editorial, the "increased costs were supposed to be justified by market efficiencies and improved health for recipients that ostensibly would come from private competition and increased enrollment in health maintenance organizations," but an analysis recently published in Health Affairs found that "there are no apparent gains in the quality of care" in MA plans. The editorial concludes, "The Obama administration and congressional Democrats should move quickly to reduce" the extra MA plan payments and "eventually eliminate them," adding, "If the private sector wants to compete with government, then it should do so without a taxpayer-funded bonus" (St. Petersburg Times, 12/7).
  
  
• Wall Street Journal: Obama "will not make the same mistake" that former President Bill Clinton made on health care reform in the 1990s, with congressional Democrats "already deep into the legislative weeds" on the issue and former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), the likely nominee for HHS Secretary, "organizing the interest groups and a grassroots lobbying effort," a Journal editorial states. According to the editorial, "Obama may be gesturing at a more centrist direction in economics and national security, but health care is where he seems bent on pleasing the political left" (Wall Street Journal, 12/9).

Opinion Pieces

• Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), Charleston Gazette: The federal government, in response to the current economic recession, must "provide additional assistance to struggling families and states," as failure to "do so will lead to large increases in the number of uninsured children or sharp spending cutbacks, which would endanger economic recovery," Maloney writes in a Gazette opinion piece. According to Maloney, "Obama and the 111th Congress will make major health care reform a priority," but "we can't wait for large-scale reforms to make sure that no American child is without coverage for their basic medical needs." She adds, "Guaranteeing health insurance coverage to all of America's children should be put on par with our commitment to all of our seniors through Medicare" (Maloney, Charleston Gazette, 12/7).
  
  
• Grace-Marie Turner, Charleston Gazette: "It is much less expensive to cover children than adults," but that "does not mean the government must provide the insurance," Turner, president and founder of the Galen Institute, writes in a Gazette opinion piece. According to Turner, "expanding SCHIP to cover all children would be a mistake" because "Congress should make sure poorer, uninsured children are covered first"; an expansion of the program would "'crowd out' the private insurance many higher-income kids already have"; "putting many millions of children on a government program will quickly lead to restrictions on access to care"; and "government insurance means that politicians and bureaucrats, not parents, make" coverage decisions (Turner, Charleston Gazette, 12/7).
  
  
• Rose Ann DeMoro, Philadelphia Inquirer: Requirements that all U.S. residents must have health coverage -- such as those recommended by America's Health Insurance Plans and BlueCross BlueShield Association -- "would be exactly the wrong direction for health care reform" and "would be a massive bailout for one of the most merciless industries in America," DeMoro, leader of the California Nurses Association National Nurses Organizing Committee, writes in an Inquirer opinion piece. She writes that a Medicare-like program that expanded coverage to everyone would be the "most effective way to fix our broken health care system." She concludes, "Such a program is the only way to control costs through negotiated fee schedules, global budgets, bulk purchasing, a huge cut in administrative waste, and other measures," adding that "it's the only way to wrest control of our health from the insurers" (DeMoro, Philadelphia Inquirer, 12/8).
  
  
• Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), Roll Call: The U.S. is "on the brink of handing over a greater share of our health and health care to an ever-increasing federal overseer," and although "most people do not equate medical care with freedom," they will have a different opinion when "a greater slice of the health care budget is controlled by Washington, D.C.," Burgess, a physician, writes in a Roll Call opinion piece. "As the narrative for change unfolds in the days and months ahead, nowhere will the potential for affecting our lives be greater than in the health care arena," he writes, adding, "So it is no surprise that we are seeing a number of new and recycled proposals offered for discussion," but the "lack of Republican or market-based reforms is both incongruous and inexcusable" (Burgess, Roll Call, 12/8).
  
  
• Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Roll Call: "Health care was a critical issue to voters in November," and with the election of Obama, "Americans demanded that our dysfunctional health care system be reformed," House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Dingell writes in a Roll Call opinion piece. "Not only is such reform essential for the health of our citizens, it's also critical for the global competitiveness of our economy," he writes, adding, "There is a clear demand and an urgent need for a new, more effective system" (Dingell, Roll Call, 12/8).
  
  
• David Osborn, Tennessean: "There appears to be significant momentum" among lawmakers to enact health care reform that would offer U.S. residents "more affordable, accessible, advanced health care," Osborn, executive director of Health Care Solutions Group, writes in a Tennessean opinion piece. Osborn continues that a "reform-focused approach to health care in America must include: Input from stakeholders who understand complexities of our health care system"; continued "commitment to make increased access to care a priority -- despite a weak economy"; a "serious attempt to reduce variations in how health care is delivered"; proposals "to make Medicare financially viable long-term"; and preserving "renown aspects of the U.S. health care system." He adds, "While addressing serious issues of access and costs, we must find ways to continue to invest in developing new drugs, procedures and therapies to save the lives of millions of people in the U.S. and around the world" (Osborn, Tennessean, 12/7).
  
  
• Wayne Riley, Tennessean: It is "intellectually dishonest to suggest" that health care overhaul plans such as the one proposed by President-elect Barack Obama and other Democrats are "socialized medicine" because these plans are "no more so than the effective and relatively efficient Medicare program -- a landmark governmental health initiative" that is "cherished and depended upon by millions of Americans for their care," Riley, a physician who also holds a MBA, writes in a Tennessean opinion piece. He adds that the Obama plan does not "call for the establishment" of a single-payer system but rather "preserves the best features of our private insurance market with increased regulatory standards." He writes, "At no time has there been as much momentum for restructuring our health care system," concluding, "Now is the time to seize the moment and ride the wave of change to make a healthier America" (Riley, Tennessean, 12/7).
  
  
• Roger Zoorob, Tennessean: "Despite being the most costly in the world, the U.S. health care system remains fragmented and chaotic" that requires "a 360-degree change in the way our health care system is managed or -- dare I say -- mismanaged," Zoorob, a physician who also holds a Master of Public Health degree, writes in a Tennessean opinion piece. He continues, "Every American needs and deserves a primary care physician provider through a medical home," and the "medical home model" proposed by the American Academy of Family Physicians would "provide continuity of care, treat the person as a whole, ... provide services of early treatment and prevention, coordinate care and recommend use of electronic health care systems ... and chronic disease management." Zoorob questions whether "this dream [will] tie in with the change Obama declared during the campaign" and with his proposal for expanding health coverage to more U.S. residents. He concludes, "Time will tell, but at least the initial plans coincide and the hopes are the same" (Zoorob, Tennessean, 12/7).

Letter to the Editor
"The insurance industry proposal to force all Americans to purchase health insurance would be as wrong as Detroit automakers asking Congress to force all Americans to purchase a new GM or Ford car every year" because "Americans have the right to purchase (or not purchase) insurance in a free market, based on a rational assessment of their needs," according to a Boston Globe letter to the editor by Paul Hsieh, co-founder of Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine. Hsieh writes that rather than "mandatory health insurance, America needs free-market reforms, such as allowing patients to purchase insurance across state lines and to use health savings accounts for routine expenses," as well as "allowing insurers to sell inexpensive, catastrophic-only policies." He concludes, "Such reforms could reduce costs and make insurance available to millions who cannot currently afford it" (Hsieh, Boston Globe, 12/8).