College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Editorial: True health care reform unlikely in the US

By

|

Published: Sunday, November 8, 2009

Updated: Sunday, November 8, 2009

The United States House of Representatives passed its version of the health care bill Saturday night by a 220-215 vote.

The legislation, dubbed "The Affordable Health Care for America Act," would make it illegal for insurance providers to deny medical coverage due to preexisting condition, or charge higher premiums based on medical history, while providing subsidies to those who cannot afford health insurance; bringing coverage to 96 percent of Americans.

The bill will move on to the Senate for amendment and approval.

If passed, which seems unlikely in the face of stiff Republican and independent opposition, the two bills will go before congressional committee to be melded into a single bill.

That version of the bill will then go back through both chambers before signed into law by President Barack Obama.

The likelihood of that entire process transpiring while maintaining all of those original provisions seems even more unlikely.

Especially considering the current mood of the American public.

After being met by overwhelming support last spring, Rasmussen Reports show that support for comprehensive health reform has stayed between 41-46 percent since July, as many feel a strong disconnect between what such reform claims to offer and what will ultimately transpire (in the form of higher taxes or misuse of the system).

As college journalists, the prospect of graduating college and working a job without guaranteed health coverage is daunting.

But that’s the reality for millions of others in this country, living on low wages and unable to pay high insurance premiums.

America’s Health Insurance Plans study found that average monthly premiums for single coverage exceed $500 in many states. West Virginia, which is below the national average, has an average of $211 per month.

Faced with rent or a new mortgage, car payments, utilities, food and other bills, paying hundreds of dollars per month to maintain health coverage seems of secondary importance for many young workers and recent graduates.

This practice inevitably leads to more shameful trips to the emergency room (footed by taxpayer dollars) and ultimately poorer health outcomes.

For us, a low cost public option to compete with private industry and reduce costs seems appealing.

Unfortunately, most don’t feel the same regarding health reform.

Regardless of the slow-moving political process, the fluid desires of the American public, or even the added cost to American taxpayers, the debate boils down to a single question: Is health care a right?

The rest of the advanced world thinks so.

And millions will continue to suffer in this country until America does, as well.
 

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

15 comments

Dave
Thu Nov 12 2009 19:15
"Dave, do you really believe there is equal opportunity for all in this country? Wait , aren't you the same idiot who was defending Glenn Beck in another one of these articles? "

AH! Name calling! Thanks, I appreciate it. Calling someone else an idiot really serves to make your point (makes you sound SO much more intelligent than actually saying something that is relevant to the discussion). And yes, I was defending Glenn Beck. I'll ask you the same thing I ask everyone else: what has he been wrong about? Was he wrong about Van Jones? ACORN? What has he lied about? He is attacked because no one can argue what he says. If you look at the media attacks on him, they are all character attacks, not attacks on the factual basis of what he presents on his show.

And yes, to answer your question, I believe everyone has a fair shot at success in this country. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't, but no one is guaranteed success or happiness, only the pursuit of it.

Your name
Thu Nov 12 2009 16:50
Dave, do you really believe there is equal opportunity for all in this country? Wait , aren't you the same idiot who was defending Glenn Beck in another one of these articles?
tom
Wed Nov 11 2009 15:30
White dude born into privilege condemning those who he can't relate to.
Dave
Wed Nov 11 2009 10:34
Joel, I have no idea what difference that makes (why must race be injected into everything? Thats what keeps prejudice and racism largely alive in this country). I guess you would call my family middle class, we were in no means wealthy; we lived pretty frugally and parents always managed to make ends meet but it was a struggle for them, still is. I understand what many people in this country go through in terms of trying to make ends meet, if thats what you're getting at. My race is irrelevant to this discussion.
joel
Tue Nov 10 2009 14:03
Dave, are you white and did you grow up in a middle class family?
Dave
Tue Nov 10 2009 10:59
Staff: my post seems to be being filtered again. I did not have a link in it, so I don't know why it would be being flagged as spam.
WVU Mom
Tue Nov 10 2009 10:34
Dave, you make noteworthy points. I hope that you are very wealthy some day. Personally, I consider myself working middle class. Here's the reality for my family: During the last decade, my husband and I have worked more hours and made less money. We both work at the same Fortune 500 company in Western NY. We're not factory workers. We're fairly well education - formally and informally if you will. I work in an office and my husband has a technical job. We are NONunion. Every year the cost of our health care has increased to the point where we have less and less "family" money. We don't take a vacation every year, and we don't drive new cars. We don't spend a lot on our home and live fairly frugal lives. Although we consider ourselves extremely blessed, the fact is that we are hurting. The American Dream is getting farther and farther out of reach. Perhaps you are lucky enough that you won't have any student loans. That's good. My children will. So what will their lives be like when they graduate and begin their careers? Will they work for a company that has a health care benefit? How will they afford to work, pay off their school loans, pay for their health care and living needs, let alone ever be able to buy a home? I don't know all the details behind health care reform, but I can tell you this - it should be for people like me, and my neighbors and people who pay taxes and put money into the economy. If we're not helped, this country is screwed. We feed and house the poor and, frankly, we help keep the weathly...wealthy. I'm thinking also that there are a lot of people who want health care reform because those are the people who voted for Pres. Obama. If you look at the demographics of those voters, only a small percent were "poor." Most of them were just old working folk like me. No argument with anything you said...just another dimension on the discussion.
Dave
Mon Nov 9 2009 23:54
"Wow. Dave, have you considered the fact that minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, which is barely over $15,000/yr before taxes for an individual working 40hrs/week for 52 weeks. Even if these people don't pay any federal income tax, who can realistically live off that, let alone afford to buy any sort of private insurance if it's not offered through their employer? Employer subsidized insurance isn't necessarily within reach either."

I am aware what the minimum wage is. I do not believe we should just hand things over to people. If they want to make more, work harder and get a better job. No one said its easy. You have to work hard to succeed in life. Another poster mentioned "ultra-low wages"... if minimum wage is considered an "ultra low wage", perhaps you should contact your Congressman and lodge a complaint, because that number was just set by Congress.

"Lessening the gap between the poor and the wealthy isn't socialism- it's a matter of basic human decency."

It is socialism, social justice, whatever you want to call it, when it is imposed by the government. You may think its "basic human decency", I do not. I believe everyone should have an equal opportunity to succeed. What you do with that opportunity is up to you (you will recall- we are guaranteed the pursuit of happiness, but not happiness itself). It is natural that some will be more successful than others. Most of those that are wealthy have worked very hard and made many sacrifices to get where they are. Good for them. They shouldn't have to pay outrageous taxes to subsidize everyone else.

I would like to see the gap between rich and poor closed by the poor becoming more wealthy. However, the more likely situation is the rich will become poor. Thats what government intervention does.

"Miraculously, we have this fabulous opportunity to ensure that every American has affordable access to basic health care and insurance while the stratification remains firmly intact. "

Do you really believe that the health care reform being proposed by the House will make health care more affordable? We'll find out in 5-10 years if it gets through the Senate, but I see it making things 100 times worse for everyone.

Fall Grad
Mon Nov 9 2009 23:05
Wow. Dave, have you considered the fact that minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, which is barely over $15,000/yr before taxes for an individual working 40hrs/week for 52 weeks. Even if these people don't pay any federal income tax, who can realistically live off that, let alone afford to buy any sort of private insurance if it's not offered through their employer? Employer subsidized insurance isn't necessarily within reach either.
Beyond that, I'm amazed by people who claim that their tax dollars shouldn't have to go toward health insurance for these so-called 'poor' people, but realistically a lot of people working full-time out there do pay taxes which go to pay for the insurance of those worse off than them, when they can't afford it for themselves. The stereotypical 'poor' that everyone loves to talk about do have some government health care options such as Medicaid, Medicare, CHIP, and various low-income adult insurance programs. If you're really that 'poor' then assistance is there. A significant portion of the individuals without health insurance fall in the mid-to-lower end of the middle class spectrum. We don't think of people making $25-50k/year as 'poor', but particularly if they have a family to support, their budget can be extremely tight. Lessening the gap between the poor and the wealthy isn't socialism- it's a matter of basic human decency. Miraculously, we have this fabulous opportunity to ensure that every American has affordable access to basic health care and insurance while the stratification remains firmly intact.
Dave
Mon Nov 9 2009 10:27
"The wealthy have the power and tax the poor through that control. CEOs make the decision to offer ultra low wages, poor hours and no insurance to their hourly workers while they take in million dollar salaries."

Tax the poor? What tax do the poor pay (other than sales tax, which everyone pays)? Please enlighten me. 47% of the people in this country pay no federal income tax. And because there are minimum wage laws, there are no ultra-low wage pay jobs, unless of course you are breaking the law by being here illegally.

Also, what is wrong with someone making a million dollar salary? Why in the world should we care? All the power to them I say! The only reason anyone should care is if (a) you are employed by the company or (b) you own stock in the company. If you do, then you have a vested interest in the situation. If not, who cares. The problem is, right now we all have to care because the government has decided it should own private companies. Government needs to get out of private businesses. The beginning of this health insurance issue can be traced back to FDR's wage fixing policies in the 40s.

"This is just trying to shorten the massive gap between the haves and have nots."

So, this is redistribution of wealth, aka socialism??

Dave
Mon Nov 9 2009 10:22
WVU Mom, many things have been suggested. Some ideas are tort reform and increasing competition by allowing you to buy insurance across state lines. I also believe restricting the advertisement of prescription medication would be a good step as well (who really needs to see those? If you have a problem, goto the doctor and the doctor should know what to give you. You shouldn't be suggesting medications to your doctor. By eliminating drug ads, the cost of the drugs will go down directly and there will be less people going to the doctor demanding a drug they saw an ad for, further reducing costs).

Just doing those three things would have a pretty significant downward effect on health costs. Why not do those things and maybe some of the other simple things I'm forgetting at the moment and see what effect it has? Now I know, that addresses the cost problem, but not the issue of the uninsured in this country.

First, let me state that health insurance/care is NOT a right! You may believe it should be a right (separate discussion), but it is not. That is defined by the Constitution. The government and society in general is not obliged to provide health insurance or health care to its citizens. However, I believe that we could provide vouchers to contribute to basic health insurance for the poor. I do not think that we should force people to get health insurance though (pretty sure that is not Constitutional and there are people lining up to sue the government over that already).

These proposals would cost a fraction of what is being proposed currently, and would not greatly increase government power over our lives. Makes a lot more sense to me- why let the people that botched the stimulus, TARP, bailouts, Katrina, Medicaid/Medicare, and Social Security run our health care? No thanks.

joel
Mon Nov 9 2009 10:09
The wealthy have the power and tax the poor through that control. CEOs make the decision to offer ultra low wages, poor hours and no insurance to their hourly workers while they take in million dollar salaries.

This is just trying to shorten the massive gap between the haves and have nots.

WVU Mom
Mon Nov 9 2009 09:49
So Dave, what is a "common sense" approach?
Dave
Mon Nov 9 2009 08:00
"as many feel a strong disconnect between what such reform claims to offer and what will ultimately transpire (in the form of higher taxes or misuse of the system)."

When has the government ever done something this big (or even half as big) under budget? They always go way over budget and do not provide what they said they would. The American people realize this.

"Is health care a right? The rest of the advanced world thinks so."

What does it matter what the rest of the world thinks? According to the US Constitution, the highest law of our land, it is most certainly not a right. If enough Americans disagree with that, we could perhaps amend the Constitution to add that in, but as of now, its not in there. And that is really where that discussion ends.

TNMountaineer is exactly right. I am sick and tired of being called heartless, being told that I hate the poor, etc, just because I don't support the health care "reform" being tossed around by Obama and Pelosi (its just as ridiculous as those who were opposed to the Iraq War being told they hated America). The bill passed by the House is not reform, it is a means of centralizing more power in Washington, enacting "social justice" and redistribution of wealth by increasing taxes on the wealthy, and is a back door to limiting gun ownership (yes, this bill would make your health insurance premiums potentially go up if you own a gun, how about that as a back door for undermining the Constitution), among many other things we don't even know about yet. This MUST be stopped. A more common sense approach to reform is needed.

TNMountianeer
Mon Nov 9 2009 06:57
No one in their right mind does not want health care reform. The only question is how is it to be achieved. If the current attempt in Congress fails, as seems to be indicated in this article, then we need to be lobbying our state and congressional leaders for tort reform and changing laws to allow purchase of insurance across state lines. Our rights are spelled out very clearly in our founding documents.






log out