Min:24 °C Max:32 °C
» Weather Details
November 23, 2009 Monday

ST Breaking News | Blogs | From Around The World
Luke T Johnson
Assistant to Editor
Reforming the reform debate
August 29, 2009 Saturday, 07:40 PM
Luke Johnson on the misinformation & scare-mongering in the healthcare debate.

THE death of "liberal lion" Teddy Kennedy has sparked a mass outpouring of remembrance and tribute to the life of the legendary Senator.

Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, have seized the opportunity to try to regain some traction in the push to reform American health care, a cause close to Kennedy's heart.

Senator Chris Dodd, a longtime friend of Kennedy who has served as temporary chairman of the Senate health committee in the late senator's absence, was quoted by the Washington Post as saying he hopes Kennedy's death "will maybe cause people to take a breath, step back, and start talking with each other again, in more civil tones, about what needs to be done".


SOURCE: AP

Indeed, it is an opportune time to try to reform the debate about reform, and a note civility is desperately needed.

While Congress has been on its summer break this month, the debate about health care has degenerated into a farcical shouting match pitting mendacious ideologues against dumbfounded legislators.

Health-care reform is aimed at bettering the lives of millions of people and would seem worthy of serious debate. Instead, the effort has drawn conspiracy theorists and would-be militiamen - armed and ready for battle - into the daylight, as the debate has been dragged into a realm of baffling insanity, sometimes even by  members of the Senate.

The popular but ludicrous notion that the House Bill currently under discussion would create "death panels" - in essence, government bodies that decide whose life is worth saving and whose should be ended - has sparked a wave of unfounded fear that widespread euthanasia is imminent, and has led a disturbingly vocal sector of protesters to declare that Barack Obama is a Nazi, among other things.

This frenzy of racism and willful ignorance is troubling enough, but that's only the beginning. Proud gun-owners have been showing up to health-care protests sporting loaded handguns and even assault rifles, ostensibly to flaunt their second-amendment rights. Their actions are shockingly legal, despite their proximity to the president. But it makes you wonder which death panels pose the real threat.

Now is the time to do as Mr Dodd suggested - step back and take a breath. Bringing American health care in line with the rest of the developed world is urgently needed; Mr Obama has made it the cornerstone of his presidency.

But what's the big deal?

Forget for a moment that nearly 50 million Americans live without any kind of health coverage, or that the country spends some US$2 trillion on annual care. According to a June report in the American Journal of Medicine, US medical bills in 2007 were at the root of 62 per cent of personal bankruptcies.

The shocking part is that more than 75 per cent of those bankrupt families already had health insurance, but they were still buried by their medical bills.

Conservative critics of health-care reform claim that America's privatised system makes for the best health care in the world. That is only partly accurate, according to a recent study by the Urban Institute, a non-partisan public policy think-tank, which says the US ranks among the best in the world in areas such as treating cancer, but is nowhere near the best in areas such as deaths from treatable and preventable illnesses.

Democrats now refer to "health insurance reform", partly as a rhetorical concession, but also since it is the insurance system that really requires an overhaul. Health insurance companies are notorious for finding loopholes that disavow them of having to pay when their customers get sick.

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote recently about a former health-insurance executive who would get handsomely rewarded whenever he could find a way out of paying a patient's bills, thus saving his firm potentially millions of dollars.

Writing in Newsweek last month, Kennedy said that providing adequate health care to all Americans was "the cause of my life". Many have said that his absence from the Senate is a big reason why the debate has gotten so out of control. Some hope to rally around the death of the lion and pass a reform Bill in his honour.

Such a storybook ending seems unlikely in the short term. The debate about health care has slipped off the rails and, powered by misinformation and scare-mongering, is quickly becoming a train wreck. The best health-care reformers can hope for immediately is to breathe some reason back into the debate.

Reforming health care (and health insurance) is an infinitely complex undertaking and requires serious thought. The Bill currently taking shape is hardly perfect, but in order for reform to be successful - and it must be successful - honest and legitimate concerns must be addressed and thoughtful compromise needs to take place.

Kennedy commanded respect even from his fiercest critics, which is how he was able to accomplish so much in his storied career. If members of Congress truly want to honour his legacy when they return from recess next month, they will take a deep breath and restart the debate with genuine civility because, as Mr Dodd said, "that's what Teddy would do".


SOURCE: AP



Tags: , ,

 
Total comments: 3
James Raymond
September 23, 2009 Wednesday

Around 85 percent of Americans have health insurance, and the vast majority are happy with their coverage. People from around the world come to America to get the best treatment in the world. Pretty good situation. True, cost have been going up too much. But, instead of trying to adjust a few areas, like implimenting "loser pays" tort reform or the removal of Government restrictions on cross State line purchase of policys, they want to change the enire system. Why not try a few solutions that doctors suggest before spending several hundred billion on a Government run system?

comment 6955 | Offensive? Report this comment
Kelly
August 31, 2009 Monday

Your commentary/opinion, Luke, is a nice overview of the American liberal point of view. Do you have anyone at SG Times to provide a clear and accurate overview of the multitude of conservative proposals they have on the table? They are available if only the fully Democrat-controlled Congress would look. Remember, because of their decisive majority the Democrats can ramrod anything they want through the Congress and Obama will sign almost anything so he can declare a grand victory on healthcare. You want true information-based debate? Then come clean, Democrats of Congress and of America in general, by continuing an open forum of discussion and debate instead of trying to slam through a massive 1000 page bill that would; institute a massive new gov program, further bankrupt America, place in further danger the US economy and others around the world and effect 1/7th of the US economy...instead of trying to ram it through Congress in 2 weeks as they tried to do in early August. It is suspicious when a sales person tries to get you to sign on the dotted line super fast "before the opportunity passes." It is also suspicious when a politician can't answer a straight question with a sensible, clear and declarative response. When politicians repeatedly answer questions with evasive, non-committal and indecisive answers people are correct to be hesitant to support them and to further question the proposals they so quickly want to enact. The conservatives correctly desire debate on this issue; it is wise to carefully analyze major programs before enacting them, it is their constitutional right to have their elected representatives actually listen to the people that elected them and then actually represent their desires in Washington. Furthermore, public polling has been strongly against the current House Bill for weeks now. How about you actually listen to all of those people instead of trying to make them look like extremists by only citing the few rotten apples drawing attention to themselves. Look at the masses saying they simply want to have genuine debate and also be represented by their elected representatives.

comment 6649 | Offensive? Report this comment
Mike Lang
August 31, 2009 Monday

There are many and strong opinions on this subject. I won't dignify the conspiracy theorists by offering much comment there - only to say that behind every rumor is at least a small shred of truth. Of course many of the scare tactics have been taken a bit too far to the extreme. Now to my points - as a proud American, I could care less what sort of systems the rest of the world has. One size does not fit all, and it absolutely does not fit the intensely independent American people. No matter what your opinion is, financially we can not afford this. That is the first fundamental fact of the matter. Now then - even if the economy was booming and we were running a surplus vice a deficit - socialized medicine does not work in a country that is free like the U.S. Individual people - who wrote the declaration of independence and the constitution - shall not have such government intrusion into personal areas of our lives. That is a principle we will never ever forgo, whether for the better common good or not. Next - to rebuff your point about nearly 50 million without health care coverage. That is simply hog-wash. There are tens of millions of those who have simply opted to not have coverage that is offered by their employer through group plans simply because they do not want to pay the minuscule payroll deduction to contribute toward the premium - of which the employer pays the lion's-share. Further, it is approximated that there are 15 - 20 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. who would be covered by such a healthcare plan. Illegal immigrants should not be covered by any sort of nationalized healthcare plan. In fact, they should be rounded up and deported but that is another debate to have. On your mention of people exercising the 2nd amendment right to bare arms - this is the most unambiguous amendment to the constitution. A well-armed private sector in society is an excellent and necessary deterrent to any government that may begin sliding down a pathway toward tyranny. That is why it is in there - we have experience with tyrannical governments - a lesson in history will shall not allow to be repeated. I agree with you that these proud National Rifle Association (NRA) members (of which I am one) should not bring their firearms to these rallies. I believe it is improper - but it is their right. " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. " Another point - the primary financing of the healthcare bill being proposed would come from additional taxes on the top wage earners in the U.S. We already have a progressive tax system by where the top 10% of wage earners pay over 95% of all tax burdens. It is a form of tyranny to further tax these people. They will be driven out of this country and/or will begin investing their money elsewhere if the government continues to disproportionately punish them for success.

comment 6648 | Offensive? Report this comment

Your comments are welcome. The following rules apply:

(1) Stay on topic;
(2) No abuse, please;
(3) No personal attacks;
(4) No curse words;
(5) Don't SCREAM in ALL CAPS!

To encourage a meaningful and pleasant dialogue, comments may be deleted. We look forward to your participation!

Best viewed at 1152x864 resolution with IE 6.0 or FireFox 2.0 and above Copyright © 2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn No. 198402868E | Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions