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

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

Editorials

• Denver Post: "Democrats are said to be increasingly optimistic they can get a health care revision through Congress," but the "nation's economic woes and the enormous debt the country is incurring in bailouts very well may delay full implementation of ... ambitious health care reform plans" supported by the administration of President-elect Barack Obama, a Post editorial states. "Sweeping health care reform has been an elusive goal for decades, not just because of the sensitive politics involved but also because of the cost," the editorial states, adding, "We hope the Obama administration finds a way to traverse those landmines, but we wouldn't be surprised to see such progress measured in small victories rather than wholesale change" (Denver Post, 12/18).
  
  
• Providence Journal: A recent statement by America's Health Insurance Plans that "it now wants to be an active participant in drawing up a blueprint for universal coverage in the United States" raises concerns because "insurers are in business to make money," according to a Providence Journal editorial. "One unpromising sign is the insurers' opposition to the idea of a government-run plan competing with the private ones," and health insurers also seek a "mandate that every American obtain coverage" as part a proposal "demanding guaranteed coverage for everyone," according to the editorial. The editorial states, "The politics of the moment will ensure that a national health plan happens," but "while insurers can't torpedo legislation as they did 15 years ago, they can massage the legislation to be very profitable to themselves" (Providence Journal, 12/19).
  
  
• San Antonio Express-News: "When the Barack Obama administration and Congress get around to addressing the nation's health care needs, one of the problems they must confront is the malaise among doctors," as several surveys indicate the likelihood of a future physician shortage, an Express-News editorial states. Such a "dire diagnosis of the medical profession ... should be a wake-up call for Congress and other policymakers," the editorial states. According to the editorial, "policies must ensure that physicians can maintain a healthy fiscal condition so they will stay on the job," and "reducing the burdensome bureaucratic maze that robs doctors of time with patients must also be part of any proposed solution" (San Antonio Express-News, 12/19).

Opinion Pieces

• Jon Kingsdale, Boston Globe: Massachusetts has "by far the highest rate of coverage in the country" since the implementation of a law that requires all residents to obtain health insurance, but whether the law can serve as a national model "is hard to say" because the state "had many advantages" over the nation as a whole, Kingsdale, executive director of the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, writes in a Globe opinion piece. He writes, "Challenges certainly lie ahead in Massachusetts, particularly around cost containment," and the "cost of a national bill will be a major factor in the Washington debate." However, "in the end, it is the economic impact of health care that may provide the impetus for passage of national legislation," Kingsdale writes (Kingsdale, Boston Globe, 12/20).
  
  
• Laura MacCleery/Zachary Proulx, Boston Globe: Obama has "promised a system of universal health care, but enacting one will be far more difficult than it should be" because "drug companies and other high-spending special interests will keep buying their way onto Capitol Hill if other things don't change first," a MacCleery, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, and Proulx, a research associate at the Brennan Center, write in a Globe opinion piece. They write, "So long as lawmakers need contributions to get re-elected, the drug lobby and other special interests will give them, and expect a return on their investment," and the "only way out of this endless cycle is to dismantle the access-for-favors system and take a different approach to campaign finance." The authors conclude, "A public funding system for members of Congress may be the best shot at making the real changes we've been promised" (MacCleery/Proulx, Boston Globe, 12/22).
  
  
• Ashley Sayeau, Philadelphia Inquirer: A national health care system, such as the system in Britain, allows individuals to avoid the "hours spent debating whether to make an appointment" because of cost concerns and the "days of arguing with insurance companies over deductibles and coverage," Sayeau, a writer who lives in London, writes in an Inquirer opinion piece. "In the end, a health care program that is not profit-driven creates more choices than it eliminates" and allows residents to "quit your job and go back to school without worrying about accidents and illnesses," she writes. Sayeau concludes, "Such options are unavailable to most Americans," but "if we keep an open mind as this debate" over health care reform progresses, "they can be" (Sayeau, Philadelphia Inquirer, 12/22).
  
  
• Vivian Weisman, Providence Journal: The health care proposal recently announced by AHIP would allow health insurers to "keep charging whatever they want, increasing their profits while sticking families, small businesses and taxpayers with high costs," Weisman, executive director of the Mental Health Association of Rhode Island, writes in a Journal opinion piece. She adds that the proposal would allow "your insurance company ... to decide what benefits to provide and whether or not to approve the care your doctor says that you need," and would allow health insurers to "sell insurance across state lines" and "set up shop in states with the loosest regulations." Obama and the next Congress need to implement a health care proposal that "puts the health of our families before the profits of the insurance industry," Weisman writes, adding, "We don't need another industry bailout like that proposed by AHIP" (Weisman, Providence Journal, 12/23).
  
  
• Larry Kelley, San Francisco Chronicle: Obama seeks to "create a new health care agency modeled after a soon-to-be-bankrupt Medicare" and to "first move between 32 million and 52 million Americans from private insurance coverage to public coverage, creating a new entitlement that can never be repealed," Kelley, editor of the Kelley Commentator, writes in a Chronicle opinion piece. "Obamacare will create a new government agency, paid for by all Americans," according to Kelley (Kelley, San Francisco Chronicle, 12/19).
  
  
• Spyros Andreopoulos, San Francisco Chronicle: The Obama health care proposal "will require enough doctors on the firing line ... to treat the additional people covered," and as a result, he "must craft a national health manpower policy to provide resources and reverse primary care's decline," Andreopoulos, director emeritus in the Office of Communications and Public Affairs at Stanford Medical Center, writes in a Chronicle opinion piece. He adds, "The complexity of making the needs of patients compatible with the needs of health care institutions, and producing primary care services is almost overwhelming, but an essential part of health care reform." Andreopoulos concludes, "Correcting the imbalance between the primary care practitioner and the specialist should be a top priority" (Andreopoulos, San Francisco Chronicle, 12/21).
  
  
• Greg Vigdor, Seattle Times: "The problems in our nation's health and health care lie at both the individual and systemic levels -- and both must be addressed," Vigdor, president and CEO of the Washington Health Foundation, writes in a Times opinion piece. According to Vigdor, "skyrocketing" obesity rates have led to "staggering" long-term health outcomes, and "efforts to reform America's health care system must include a federally supported social-marketing campaign to address obesity and prevention" similar to anti-tobacco campaigns. He writes, "Reform efforts must incentivize states to simplify enrollment procedures and eliminate bureaucratic barriers to health care," and the health care system "must focus on prevention, early detection and proper management of chronic diseases." Vigdor concludes, "It is now up to all of us ... to hold our leaders accountable to the mandate for change -- to demand that policy and political action be taken to improve health at this crucial moment in our country's history" (Vigdor, Seattle Times, 12/22).

Letter to the Editor
A "major new national health care program will be rushed through the next Congress without substantial debate through some mechanism such as budget reconciliation ... because many of its elements would not survive close examination," Richard Ralston, executive director of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine, writes in a Wall Street Journal letter to the editor in response to a Dec. 9 Wall Street Journal editorial. According to Ralston, the "main reason for the big rush is that nobody has a clue how the government will pay for it," and the "last thing that proponents want is for anyone to ask where the money will come from, except perhaps questions about such details as the individual rights of patients and physicians to make their own medical decisions without the approval of presidentially appointed experts" (Ralston, Wall Street Journal, 12/21).