A national health insurance reform has just passed and all is well on Capitol Hill.
But that doesn't mean too much for the rest of the country. Much of the country still wants more than a public-option-free, far-from-single-payer, band-aid-like bill to fix our broken health care system. One writer, from the interesting vantage point of Australia, where they do have universal health care, states:
But Australia has something that America lacks: a universal public system that provides basic medical services for all.
Here, thanks to Medicare, you can be cared for in a public hospital without going broke regardless of your health insurance status...But the political compromise [Barack Obama has] been forced to adopt fails to address the morbidity at the heart of the system.
It's taking the disease and trying to turn it into the cure.
The solution, the real health care reform that we've been asking for since Teddy Roosevelt's time, lies with the state single payer movement. And, at least here in Pennsylvania, we're moving full speed ahead. All that the health care reform bill means for us is that we'd better move fast if we want real health care reform any time soon.
For now, this health care bill seems to be the best we'll get out of our dysfunctional national government. It does expand Medicaid coverage; it does set up new health clinics; and it does expand insurance coverage in some helpful ways. But it doesn't address at all some fundamental problems in our system.
In that sense, it is like a Band-Aid. Instead of just patching up the system, though, we need to completely rework it. The idea of making profit off of someone's sickness - off of keeping other people sick instead of treating them! - is fundamentally flawed. And the bureaucracy of the insurance companies, among other factors, inflates health care costs to a ridiculous point.
So, as most of you reading this probably agree, the solution is single payer. And we're not going to get that at the national level. Just as they did in Canada, we've got to take it to the states.
In Pennsylvania, we've got a supportive governor, a supportive Democratic Party, and strong bipartisan support in the legislature.
And, according to the people who are at the top of this campaign, the passage of the health bill in DC isn't stopping us.
So, politically, HR 3590 is a feat; policy-wise, HR 3590 is rife with problems, challenges, and opportunities.
Washington's election year "spin" aside, HR 3590 does not deal fundamentally, systemically, or expeditiously (2014 implementation date) with questions of "affordable, comprehensive, quality, healthcare for all" even close to the degree that PA's HR 1660/SB 400 tackles those issues.
Moreover, while the national healthcare bill funnels nearly a trillion dollars to buy or subsidize insurance for the uninsured into the profit-first market, and compels (through threat of fines) the purchase of more insurance in the same Blues-monopoly market, HR 3590 does nearly nothing to address the problem of underinsurance either for the newly insured or for those who are currently insured. Insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and incidence of medical bankruptcy will continue to escalate under HR 3590.
We citizens of Pennsylvania cannot afford to wait until 2014. Nor will we ignore the obvious shortcomings of HR 3590 or the new policy opening presented by this political breakthrough.
Taking action on this has become more urgent than ever before. If states are to establish insurance exchanges by 2014, that means that they will already by making major changes to their health care system by then, and support for single payer could seriously wane. Combine this with the fact that supportive Governor Ed Rendell is not up for reelection (although pretty much all of the Democratic candidates support the legislation) in 2010, and you start to get an idea of what is needed.
1 | 2
