Common Sense Reform

Month: August 2007

  • Universal Health Care – the voice of reason

    Seldom, if ever, have we experienced individuals in the upper management levels of the health insurance/managed healthcare industry who speak out with the voice of reason, common sense and intelligence on the subject of “healthcare” vs. health “insurance.” Thus it was with extreme surprise and appreciation that I listened to the comments on this subject recently from Georganne Chapin, JD, MPhil, CEO of Hudson Health Plan in New York. The webcast is available at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/559758?src=mp.

    The text of her comments follows:
    I am a health insurance and managed care executive so you may find this editorial a bit strange. I believe that the way to fix our healthcare system is to stop relying on insurance and focus instead on healthcare.
    So, what’s wrong with health insurance?
    Well, first, it’s temporary. This may work for auto policies, but not for human health.
    Second, health insurance is mostly contingent on where you live and whom you work for. It’s easy to transfer car insurance, but not health insurance.
    Finally, insurance companies make more money by minimizing pay-outs than by keeping people healthy. Human beings — who need preventive care, who have babies, who may lack living wages and job security, and who get older–find the house rules stacked against them.
    Plans in Massachusetts,[1] California,[2] and soon New York[3] propose to strew the same old red tape over even more people. Members of the same family could end up with separate policies, with different benefits and different expiration dates. This will make it even harder for doctors and hospitals to figure out whom to bill, which services are covered, and – worst of all – whether coverage will last long enough to complete treatment for a sick patient.
    Other developed nations have universal healthcare, not “insurance.” They give healthcare to everybody, they spend less, and they are healthier for it.[4]
    But, we have an example of success in this country, too. It’s called Medicare. And while flawed, Medicare meets the most important criteria for a universal healthcare system: it’s permanent, it’s portable, and it’s simple and inexpensive to administer.
    The health insurance model is flawed because it depends on people falling between the cracks after they pay their premiums and before they collect their “benefits.” Rather than insurance, providing healthcare to everyone would cost less and deliver more in the long run.
    That’s my opinion. I’m Georganne Chapin, President and CEO, Hudson Health Plan.

    References
    1. Fahrenthold DA. Mass. bill requires health coverage. Washington Post. April 5, 2006;A01
    2. Steinhauer J. California plan for health care would cover all. New York Times. January 9, 2007;A1
    3. Holahan D, Hubert E, Schoen C. A Blueprint for Universal Health Insurance Coverage in New York. New York: United Hospital Fund and the Commonwealth Fund; December 19, 2006
    4. Davis K, Schoen C, Schoenbaum SC, et al. Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: An International Update on the Comparative Performance of American Health Care. New York: Commonwealth Fund; May 2007: pub. no. 1027

  • Bush Bashing – A Problem?

    A recent newspaper article noted the flurry of “Bush Bashing,” particularly, in this case, in the form of greeting cards. Since no company will produce something that won’t sell, we can safely assume that a significant number of Americans are amused and/or disgusted enough to buy a greeting card calling Bush a clown or a moron.


    While this is an interesting perspective on the collective humor quotient and popularity (negative, in this case) of a particular person, it can also be dangerous. To make fun of something or someone first of all is a form of sarcastic humor, which is not always productive, and it also diffuses the fact that Bush and company is an extremely dangerous combination in a national leadership role.


    A recently released documentary, “No End In Sight,” may be of interest on this subject. One reviewer says that it is….”an exposure of the psycho-pathology of power.” (David Denby, The New Yorker, 8/6/2007)


    Bush is the epitome of what a leader should not be. His actions speak very loudly that he does not have the welfare of this country in mind and he is certainly not anyone we would want to emulate or hold up as an example of exemplary human qualities.


    Bush, and congress, for that matter, have completely obliterated the basic concept upon which America was built – that we would have a government of the people, by the people and for the people.


    The positive side to this is that perhaps enough people will become so reviled by the current state of affairs that we will make a greater effort to effect the necessary changes to truly protect and defend our liberty and become once again an example for the rest of the world.