Health Insurance for All Children.....A must!

In another battle between private and public healthcare coverage in America, democrats in the House of Representatives have called on a plan that would make changes to the Medicare program as well as increase insurance coverage for children from low to middle-income families.

According to the Associated Press, the legislation would implement a federal tax increase of 61-cents on each pack of cigarettes, and the revenue would be used to help finance health insurance for children from families whose yearly financial income prohibits them from receiving traditional Medicare coverage, but still can’t afford to purchase a health insurance plan.

The plan is a follow-up of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which expires on Sept. 30, and according to the AP lawmakers in both the House and the Senate support an increase in federal spending for children’s health insurance, with the House supporting a steeper increase.

The bill, which would also restructure the way Medicare dollars are spent, once again brings up the debate between private and public health insurance in America. Ideally, all children should have health insurance coverage, but in the United States that is certainly not a reality.

The Problem

According to a study done by the National Coalition on Health Care, 8.3 million children in the US were uninsured in 2005 (about 11.2 percent of all US children).

The same study also reported that “nearly 40 percent of the uninsured population reside in households that earn $50,000 or more.”

This highlights the fact that, with health insurance costs on the rise, it is not just low-income families that struggle to pay for health insurance; middle-income families are also struggling. This legislation appears to target these struggling middle-class families, in an attempt to make sure more US children are covered, which is a step in the right direction.

The Solution

The bill highlights the thin line between free-market health insurance, which is currently failing to meet the needs of the American population, and a government-run universal healthcare system, which would be inadequate, at best.

Government run universal healthcare is not the answer for America, a country that thrives on a free market economy and frowns upon the socialistic concepts that government sponsored universal healthcare demands. Universal healthcare delivered through private insurance option, is, however, what American needs.

In addition, Americans need to begin making better decisions regarding health and wellness. If we could learn to take better care of ourselves our insurance costs would go down immediately. Simply consuming healthy foods and participating in physical activity greatly reduces the risk of developing many chronic illnesses, which in turn helps reduce healthcare cost.

Another idea is to “bargain shop” for health care treatment. With new consumer directed healthcare choices, we are able to choose the doctors that provide the best quality of service for the most reasonable price. Demanding quality of service from our doctors and refusing to overpay for services can drastically affect market prices for healthcare.

Demanding that our leaders take wellness and healthcare efforts seriously is also very important. Research the different 2008 presidential candidates, and make sure your vote goes to someone committed to solving the healthcare crisis in America.

While these solutions do require time and effort, it is a small price to pay for more affordable healthcare. Taking these steps could ensure the fundamental idea that every child, and every person for that matter, deserves access to affordable health insurance coverage.

Who is Sicko? Really now!

Just when it feels like the healthcare debate is just beginning to heat up, Michael Moore’s ‘Sicko’ adds fuel to the fire by speaking to a general population that more and more is concerned with the rising cost of medical expenses and health insurance in America. When area Americans going to be concerned about the health status they possess, which drives costs?

Moore’s film explores the downfalls of the American for-profit healthcare system and speaks volumes about the emotional and often tragic consequences that go along what that system. His interviews with the families and victims of tragedies due to inability to pay for medical expenses or the denial of insurance coverage are touching, saddening and ultimately frustrating.

Moore also shows the so-called perfection of healthcare systems in countries that offer universal coverage for their citizens. What he fails to show, however, are the downfalls that can come with this type of universal coverage.

While there is no doubt that something needs to be done about the healthcare system in our country, Moore’s suggestion that a universal healthcare system, like they have in the UK or Canada, would solve all our problems is short-sighted and altogether misinformed. He fails to address the problems that are present in these systems such as long waiting periods for care, the inability to choose your physician and the high taxes associated with having “free” healthcare. He also ignores the fact that in some countries where universal coverage is available, people choose not to use it. For example, in the UK approximately 12 % of people have chosen private health insurance in lieu of using the National Health System. This points to the fact that even in the “perfection” of universal healthcare, there are still problems.

Moore also does not address the simple fact that the quality of care in the US is often far superior to the quality of care received in other countries. Because of the privatized healthcare system in America, the medical research and development that occurs here far surpasses the development that occurs in other countries. So while there are certainly downfalls in the way the American system treats healthcare there are also benefits, such as a higher quality of care and higher rate of development.

While it would be hard to disagree with the idea that everyone deserves access to quality medical care, moving to a universal healthcare system in the United States would not be as perfect as Moore would like us to think. His utopian presentation of a world in which prescription drugs are cheap, doctors visits are free and overall care is up to US standards is enticing, although not quite realistic. I support a universal coverage system in America, where those who want to improve their basic benefit package can buy supplemental health insurance on the free open market, just like they would be able to do for the basic coverage package.

If Moore’s goal was to get the attention of the public he certainly succeeded. If his goal, however, was to accurately portray the downfalls of the US healthcare system and suggest a realistic alternative, he failed miserably. But, Moore’s polarized and oversimplified view has gotten peoples’ attention. As the old adage goes, ‘there is no such thing as bad publicity.’ Publicity for the healthcare debate, in this case. If ‘Sicko’ has done only one thing it has been to raise awareness and fuel the debate about the problems within the healthcare system, which can only be the first step toward any real change.