The health care debate: A must-do proposition (Part two)

by Senator Will Espero
District 20

“On the day of 9/11, the only people running UPSTAIRS in the burning towers to rescue people, were from the government.” Governor Ed Rendell

The government does many things very well, contrary to long-standing neoconservative efforts to have people think otherwise. As Hardball host Chris Matthews reminded us, when the issue of fluoridating water to prevent cavities was debated, those who were against it argued vehemently that fluoride was a chemical used for mind control. As silly as that was, that irrationality has resurfaced in the vocal citizens whose shouting and threats of violence at town hall meetings across the country are preventing rational discussion of the critical issue of access to affordable care.

What should be a civil, intelligent debate on how we can resolve the rocketing costs and improving access to needed medical care, has been usurped by misrepresentation and distortion from corporations with a great deal to lose. MSNBC recently reported statistics that explain why these corporations do not want reform. Under the “free market” approach of the Bush administration, health industry profits rose from $2 billion in 2000 to more than $12 billion in 2007. There was a 24% increase in uninsured persons as tens of thousands saw their policies canceled, from 35 million to more than 46 million. Premiums escalated significantly and covered persons saw their benefits decline. Health company CEOs earned an average $11 million each. One CEO took home over $100,000 an hour, and each of the 9 bedrooms in his three mansions cost about $87,000. (This same “free market/no government regulation” approach under the previous administration, ironically, resulted in the largest government intervention in history: the $700 billion bailout of our financial institutions.)

Health care reform is needed because of how these billions in profits were made. Coverage eligibility was restricted; those with pre-existing conditions were deemed ineligible. Patients who had faithfully paid their premiums saw their insurance canceled because they needed medical care. Treatment was denied because it was not a “covered benefit,” was not “medically unnecessary,” or exceeded a cap. “Covered benefits” were restricted. Payments to physicians saw declines. Under the plans in Congress, these denial of care tactics will be eliminated. Doctors and patients alike stand to gain from health care reform.

The federal government has been superbly successful at a large number of things, up to the point where loud protestors get government to cut off funding, only to then point to the decline as evidence of the superiority of free markets. Markets do some things very well: they concentrate capital, test businesses through competition, promote energetic investment and speculation, and generate wealth. But many services – such as health care – would decline or vanish, or actually have suffered under the marketplace. The role of government is to provide for the general well-being of its people. The health care industry has successfully used its influence, ads, and scare tactics in the past to kill reforms that would provide Americans the care they need. The scariest thing is not doing anything. We need to remember all the government-provided services that make our lives as comfortable as they are, trust in government, and get reform passed now.

WHAT GOVERNMENT DOES WELL

The federal government has been superbly successful at a large number of things, and together with state and local governments provide us with necessities and conveniences that we take for granted. None of these services or programs make us “socialist” but are what people expect. We should take comfort that government can competently handle projects and trust government to also handle the complex issue of providing access to affordable health care.