Community Service Paper

Nathan Ramos

Mr. McAlister

Government

4/13/11

Healthcare:

Reforming the United States’ System and Global Application

Part I:

Since the early 1900’s the United States has aimed for total healthcare reform from privatization. Companies supplying health insurance began in the 1910’s because of employer’s personal interests and physicians securing their practice to be profitable. From opposed politicians, socialism sentiments, or loss of faith in the government by voters, Presidents have met opposition with bills regarding universal healthcare. For example, during the Roosevelt administration, private industry dictated the rules of health insurance.

Employers were still opposed to the idea of universal health care because of the freeze on wages during World War II. The freeze did not apply to health benefits, which therefore allowed employers to recruit new employees with richer health care packages. If the United States had changed over to a universal health care system, employers would have lost this recruiting tool. Physicians, the American Medical Association (AMA), and the emerging health insurance industry were also against a universal system. Roosevelt submitted his Social Security bill in 1935 but was opposed unanimously by all parts of Congress. After seeing the extent of the opposition to universal health care, he decided to cut the health insurance portion from his idea of an old age insurance program. (Farrell)

Having the government not regulate private industry, has been a common theme for future attempts at reforming healthcare. Other significant tries have been attempted in the presidencies of Truman, Nixon, Carter, and Clinton, but none had been successful until Barack Obama’s healthcare reform plans that he advocated in the beginning of his campaign. While on his journey to the White House, Obama promised to make medical insurance affordable to every American. Reaching this goal would require a great deal of negotiation and compromise. Using a process called budget reconciliation, Democrats stopped the power of the filibuster. This act caused more criticism from conservatives.

Republicans heavily contested that plan, however, arguing that Democrats were using questionable legislative maneuvers to prevent them from mounting a filibuster. Indeed, many critics of the Democrats' plans blasted the use of reconciliation as an undemocratic tactic. Democrats countered that reconciliation had been used many times—often by Republicans—and that there was nothing undemocratic about passing legislation with a 51-vote majority. ("Health Care Reform.")

Although signed, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could potentially be revised or eliminated if the opposition pursues a broad or specific repeal. The biggest impediment of the healthcare program is the budget crisis facing America. Since the media is centered around the economy, Americans are less concerned with the healthcare system, and focus on the taxes that they must spend to keep the government afloat. Currently, healthcare seems to be in a deadlock between Republicans and Democrats, forcing United States’ citizens to be left holding the bill.

Part II:

There are several ways in which the current policies at the Capitol are stopping healthcare to take hold. First, the issue of waivers given by the federal government to state governments as a buffer so that their personal economies do not fail. The states first to receive the waiver were Florida, New Jersey, Ohio and Tennessee, giving negative feedback from states who had not received waivers, but Republicans had a different view:

Representative Fred Upton, Republican of Michigan and chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the waivers showed that the law, approved by Congress without any Republican votes, was “fundamentally flawed.” Without the waivers, Mr. Upton said, hundreds of thousands of people would have lost insurance or experienced a reduction in benefits. (Pear)

Personally, I feel that this is a form of pacification for Republicans, but at the same time, I feel that Obama is wanting the least amount of unrest as possible so that future deals can be made. The idea that this could show weakness or that he will knuckle under whenever threatened, could possibly present a problem for future endeavors concerning healthcare. Even more daunting is the debt that is hanging overhead. Americans have reached an all-time high for skipping on health insurance, evident by this survey on Health Days News:

In the United States, 33 percent of adults went without recommended care or drugs because of the expense, compared with 5 percent in the Netherlands and 6 percent in the United Kingdom, according to the report.In addition, 20 percent of U.S. adults had problems paying medical bills, compared with 9 percent in France, 2 percent in the United Kingdom, 3 percent in Germany and 4 percent in the Netherlands. (Reinberg)

Falling behind European countries with universal healthcare is a wake up call for the United States. The key for Washington is finding the right mixture of healthy spending and relatively good care, but the problem is that Americans want all of the benefits without seeing any consequences. Having seen the numbers, the state of Michigan knows full well that our current system cannot continue much longer. Employers may stop supplying enough coverage for retirement in order to save the state’s economy. Omaha officials put reality into perspective for those that are unaware:

Richard O’Gara, Omaha’s director of human resources, put the numbers in perspective. “We’re going to reach a point where in five years, retiree health care will cost us more than employee health care,” he said, adding that was partly because the city was shrinking its work force and partly because retirees used far more medical services than active workers. (Greenhouse)

This is more evidence that the system is broken, so the only answer leaves a government-funded option for citizens. The fact of the matter is that the ‘baby boomer’ generation has not fulfilled their debt to the economy and by retiring at the current age requirement, they will leave an even bigger mess than predicted.
One aspect that cannot be ignored is the procedures by which healthcare companies will fight for their current stake in the United States’ economy. Acquiring certain people in power and manipulating certain aspect of the law, most health maintenance organizations, or HMOs, are determined to make sure that universal healthcare either does not go through or is crippled. A big contributor to healthcare companies is their lobbyist faction. Gaining supporters through campaign funding and maintaining a steady pay rate based on positive results, is one surefire way to keep the blood going and money flowing. One example of the medical companies’ payment methods is Republican Phil Roe, who received campaign funding, as well as payment during the signing of Obama’s healthcare bill. Surprisingly, Republicans are not the only recipients of big company money, according to R. Jeffrey Smith of The Washington Post:

The study, conducted for The Washington Post by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, also shows that Republicans have been heavily favored in this period. While Democrats got just more than half of the industries' money before the bill was approved in spite of uniform Republican opposition, the Republican attracted 60 percent after the votes were counted. The Republican total for that period was $25.7 million, while the Democrats was $17 million. (Smith)

This finding was very surprising to me, considering the general rule of thumb is that Republicans are the minions of industry. Having seen the data, there is a clear distinction on the favorites, but due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, It is the HMOs best interest to play both sides of the field. If there is a problem that looks like there is no solution that appeases everyone, then Americans should look at the voting numbers. According to the recent polls, the older generations dominate in percentages. David Leonhardt from The New York Times explains:

The reason is not enough young people vote. The reason is partly political. Older people vote in larger numbers than younger adults. Children, of course, can’t vote at all. But beyond politics, Washington’s age bias depends on a basic misunderstanding of the budget — namely, that older people have already paid for their Medicare benefits. (Leonhardt)

In short, if young Americans want to make change instead of shifting the blame to the ‘baby boomers’, individuals must influence peers to vote. Having all contributed to the debt in some way or another, it is essential that each person take responsibility, instead of washing their hands about the matter. Healthcare can be a tool for unity and general prosperity, but the difficulty lies in executing decisions correctly to reach this destination.
Part III:
In my perspective, the way to resolve the healthcare issue is to remove or minimize big business’ role in the healthcare equation. Both political parties provide valid points to the table, although possibly the incorrect tactics. Republicans agree that spending should be cut, and I agree, but not to the execution of healthcare or social security. What does not work is cutting taxes at the current time, because without sacrifice as a nation, the nation will bury itself further in debt. As for the Democrats, the spending is reaching a critical point, but they see the objective that needs to be accomplished and are faithful in getting as much through as possible. Being split between what should and shouldn’t be done, maybe certain accomplishments should be considered in order to arrive at a decision. Like education, fire fighting service, and police service, government-run healthcare has the potential to be successful and effective. Universal coverage provides a greater safety net for the United States’ national debt and the American people as a whole. Seeing the world as a community, outreach programs like Medshare, allow people to expand their impact on a global scale. After working several days, I learned so much about the needs of third world countries and how easily we take things for granted. Doctors in developing countries go without or reuse gloves, tools, and gauze for operations when there is not enough. The increase in birthrate and worsening conditions force an overflow of patients and an exponential growth in the necessity for supplies. What my volunteer organization does is take extra packages from hospitals that are still sterile and organizes them into care packages to be sent to aid centers that request specific items. My specific job was to unload the trash bags that were full of hospital supplies so they can be counted and weighed. The stereotype that Americans under utilize and waste, in this case, is completely true. If hospitals sought to cut down on the surplus of supplies, money could be redirected to other national necessities. Thankfully, medshare provides goods specifically to a country with which we had a personal experience, the nation of Tonga. Meeting the princess of Tonga put into perspective who exactly we are helping. Her gratefulness was beyond what we had expected and it made the service feel like giving a gift, rather than carrying out a burden. The shipments are not just numbers, but they are tools that have the potential to better the life of another human being who was not as fortunate as those living here in the United States.

The most important thing that I have learned is that when people work and give out of the charity of their heart to their fellow man, without regard to what race, religion, gender, age, or political party, the outcome is far more beneficial and selfless. Without ulterior motives, politicians and voters have the ability to give aid to those who would otherwise suffer. After seeing all the statistics, it is surprising that even though the U.S. has so many charity programs helping foreign countries, it cannot give its people the complete coverage and security that the American dream has to offer. Americans should take responsibility for what has unfolded, because each vote that put respective powers into place, have not been blindly chosen. In the past, voters have chosen to deny universal healthcare from reaching the surface, but now that the law has been created, the nation can completely turn around what has been in practice for more than a century. Serving the community has greatly benefited my high school experience and learning about healthcare policies and government involvement has made me adept to the circumstances that can be molded for a better future, not only for the United States, but the world community.