OPINION & EDITORIAL
Kagen gives hope to health care crisis
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Harry Waisbren:
- Climate change hits home (April 9, 2008)
- Kagen gives hope to health care crisis (March 25, 2008)
- Assembly passes on chance to effect real change (February 29, 2008)
- For Bush, cohorts, the world is not enough (February 1, 2008)
- Legislature's approach to BTN indicative of policy stagnation (December 3, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Health care not in Constitution (March 27, 2008)
- Pell grant accessibility to hurt the workforce (September 25, 2007)
- Pell grants badly misrepresented (September 28, 2007)
- UNITY continues ASM's tradition of progressive politics (October 15, 2002)
- Russ Feingold in 2008? (September 1, 2005)
Share This:
by Harry Waisbren
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
As of yet, you may not have heard much about Rep. Steve Kagen, D-Wis. But you soon will. The freshman congressman has only been in office since 2006, yet through strong acts of leadership he is already confirming that he embodies our state’s progressive tradition. Learning about his career, as well as having the opportunity to meet and interview him, has made me even more confident of Wisconsin’s ability to lead the burgeoning progressive movement and even more proud of Wisconsin values.
Mr. Kagen’s work on health care reform is the most indicative sign of his potential to be a historic progressive leader. During Mr. Kagen’s 30-year medical career, he received such accolades as being voted by Wisconsin physicians as one of the “Best Doctors in America,” and his experience has given him a unique and important perspective for the coming fight for universal health care. He has already utilized this perspective by crafting legislation to help frame the debate in the sensible, pragmatic manner that is oh-so indicative of Wisconsin culture.
Mr. Kagen has plans to present his “No Discrimination in Health Care Act” in a hearing this spring, and coming from such a credible source, it just might shift public opinion closer to embracing universal health care. His proposed bill stipulates it will “guarantee access to affordable care for every citizen by bringing an end to the discriminatory practice of allowing insurance companies to deny life-saving medical coverage to citizens due to any pre-existing medical conditions.” By framing it as “discrimination” when health insurance is denied to citizens with pre-existing conditions, Mr. Kagen has cut to the root of the problem by exposing the un-American and heartless nature of preventing those already in need from receiving affordable care.
During our interview, Mr. Kagen explained that he wants to “take the constitutional framework and apply it to health care, then identify the essential elements that have to be in a package that covers everyone.” He emphasized it is essential to apply a constitutional rights claim to some instance of denied health care if our civil rights are to be respected, as “the constitution does guarantee every citizen the protection against discrimination and from being cherry-picked out.”
This sensible argument highlights the lunacy of a health care system that leaves 47 million Americans lacking health insurance in compellingly stark terms. It is currently illegal for insurance companies to single out blacks, women or homosexuals and deny them coverage. However, it is perfectly legal for insurers to deny Americans already suffering from pre-existing conditions — the faction whose need for health care is the most pressing. This state of affairs is truly a national embarrassment.
Mr. Kagen’s bill could possibly also lower prices for those who have insurance, as it ensures “every citizen is allowed to pay the lowest price available” by mandating an open disclosure of all prices. Mr. Kagen explained how our current health care system has become a managed marketplace devoid of competition, all due to the fact there is not an “open and transparent medical marketplace where insurance companies have to show you the price, and that is going to be the price for everyone.”
To say the least, the prospects of Mr. Kagen applying his medical savvy to related public policy has me excited about his congressional future. Our health care system is in a state of crisis, and the input from one of America’s preeminent physicians in the halls of Congress could not come at a more crucial time.
However, perhaps directly because of these prospects, Karl Rove has placed Mr. Kagen atop his list of congressmen he’d like to unseat. There is no doubt this strategy in and of itself is yet another sign of Mr. Kagen’s promising progressive nature.
It would be a travesty for both Wisconsin and the rest of the nation if we were to lose a progressive champion with such promising potential to impact the health care debate. It is essential for Mr. Kagen to weather such rank propaganda and be re-elected this fall. With any luck, he will be successful in continuing his work in the vein of Wisconsin’s progressive legacy by playing an integral role in achieving universal health care.
Harry Waisbren (hwaisbren@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in communication arts.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 6:38am):
Question: Who here thinks the health insurance companies are doing a good job?
Follow-up: No, then why are we convinced that any other system will be worse? (especially when other systems have been proven elsewhere)
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 7:24am):
been proven else where like in....Canada?
Good Call
There is a reason why the worlds rich come to America for treatment when they are sick. We have the best health care in the world, we do not have a health care problem, we have an access problem. Look to Massachusetts to see how a free market solution will work.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 8:48am):
Correction: we have the best health care in the world if you're rich or are fortunate enough to have good insurance. The free market has been a complete failure, and has consistently shown that it cannot provide necessary goods to the poor for a just price. Anything that is needed by the lower classes of our country will see a rise in price (supply and demand, right? We don't want any market inefficiency, do we now), including staple foods, medicine, and health care, and will be "rationally" priced out. So much for that. I don't care if you call it Universal health care, Hillary Care, or socialism, as long as my family can get health care when they need it.
And maybe the long lines would be avoided if we invested more in facilities and trained professionals--e.g. train more doctors--instead of wars and HMO welfare. If prospective doctors could get their training without hundreds of thousands in debt, more would take that route. You know, supply and demand again. And if the poor could get in to see a doctor early enough, without the steep charges, most likely many illnesses and problems would be caught early on, and would be cheaper in the long run-- less sick leave, scaling back communicable diseases in the workplace, less-intensive surgeries.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 10:00am):
no, 7:24, we have a HUGE cost problem, as we spend 50-100% more on health care per capita than other developed countries while getting worse health outcomes
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 10:15am):
Why the heck is UW-Madison writing a column on a guy who doesn't even represent the campus?
Suddenly the Democrats in Madison want absentee voting, that it?
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 11:10am):
Great argument! So rich people don't mind being overcharged on their health care---let's just pretend the 45 million people unable to afford health insurance don't exist and call it a day!
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 11:51am):
The system is broken and Kagen will not fix it. It will never be fixed until there is tort reform and insurance companies are abolished. The system is completely unsustainable. We cannot have people paying $100K for a procedure that only costs the hospital $1000 to perform but the insurance company bargains with the hospital with others people's money and passes those costs onto other subscribers. The doctors and hospitals must pay extremely high malpractice insurance and the system perpetuates. The system is not a free market system, but rather it is a corporate system with no signs of stopping until Americans and their representative say enough of this crap. The Democrats are in the Trial Lawyer's pockets and the Republicans are in the Insurance Companies' pockets.
Please refer to Dr. Kagen as Dr. Kagen and not Mr. Kagen. He didn't spend seven years in Evil Medical School to be called Mr. Kagen.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 11:59am):
If you think health care is expensive now just wait until it's "free".
PS. Canada sends complicated care cases south to the USA. What will they do when we have the same system they do?
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 12:21pm):
Canada's system is not as bad as you've been led to believe. There are lines here, and there are plenty of hoops for us to jump through; don't kid yourself into thinking our system is #1 in anything.
Canada sends its complicated cases here? Really? Are you suggesting that Canada is some third-world banana republic? I think Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver could provide equal care to anything in the United States.
Ultimately, insurance companies and drug companies hold a lot of blame for our out of control health costs. Why should the United States bear the brunt of pharmaceutical R&D? Why can other countries bargain for lower prices?
Money and influence.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 1:33pm):
No facilites in Canada - they had to go to Montana USA, that heath care oasis of the western world.
***
A rare set of identical quadruplets will be reunited Friday at a Calgary hospital after spending their first night apart Thursday - two in Canada and two in the United States.
Karen Jepp, 35, of Calgary delivered four healthy little girls Sunday at a hospital in Montana, after being sent there because of a shortage of neonatal beds in Canada.
"There wasn't space anywhere in Canada, so we had to turn to our friends in Montana," she said.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=78b28230-d3ff-47d3-ab04-fff760931f1a&k=66758
***
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care
David Gratzer
Socialized medicine has meant rationed care and lack of innovation. Small wonder Canadians are looking to the market
Nor were the problems I identified unique to Canadathey characterized all government-run health-care systems. Consider the recent British controversy over a cancer patient who tried to get an appointment with a specialist, only to have it canceled48 times. More than 1 million Britons must wait for some type of care, with 200,000 in line for longer than six months. A while back, I toured a public hospital in Washington, D.C., with Tim Evans, a senior fellow at the Centre for the New Europe. The hospital was dark and dingy, but Evans observed that it was cleaner than anything in his native England. In France, the supply of doctors is so limited that during an August 2003 heat wavewhen many doctors were on vacation and hospitals were stretched beyond capacity15,000 elderly citizens died. Across Europe, state-of-the-art drugs arent available. And so on.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_3_canadian_healthcare.html
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 1:40pm):
Is the federal government just soooo good at doing everything it does that we should have it control all health care?
Just how will it be any better than Medicare? You know, the Medicare system that makes the Social Security fiasco look like a model of fiscal wisdom and integrity?
Yeah, a big new federal bureaucracy - that's the ticket! A department of homeland medical care!
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 3:13pm):
"Is the federal government just soooo good at doing everything it does that we should have it control all health care?"
You probably think the government is doing a terrific job at waging war and nation building, right? Maybe they should get a little nation building practice domestically first, then worry about occupying petrol-icious lands.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 3:37pm):
"He emphasized it is essential to apply a constitutional rights claim to some instance of denied health care if our civil rights are to be respected"
People who write this stuff don't even understand the concept of rights. What would a "right" to healthcare mean? It would mean forcing someone to provide it. It would mean violating other people's rights.
"However, it is perfectly legal for insurers to deny Americans already suffering from pre-existing conditions the faction whose need for health care is the most pressing. This state of affairs is truly a national embarrassment."
This destroys the entire concept of insurance. If you can't be denied for a pre-existing condition, then why get insurance? Just wait and purchase it after you get sick. What these people want is "free" healthcare, but of course there is no such thing.
Universal healthcare means forcing one person to pay for the healthcare of others. That's what socialistic regimes do, not ones that respect rights.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 5:44pm):
"There is nothing intrinsically inefficient about bureaucracy regardless of what the Republicans tell you."
This issue is not bureaucracy vs. non-bureaucracy. The issue is force vs. voluntary trade. Government healthcare is forced healthcare, and the use of force to attain values is intrinsically destructive.
Our current healthcare system is a prime example of this destruction. Government regulation of the medical industry has brought about the high costs of medicine. The waste we see today is caused by regulations imposed on the industry.
There are two ways to reduce costs: 1) adopt socialized medicine which controls costs by rationing services, or 2) get government out of healthcare so providers can be more efficient and compete for customers in a free-market.
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 8:04pm):
Yeah, France works just fine - unless yer old, it's hot and the doctor is out.
"In France, the supply of doctors is so limited that during an August 2003 heat wave when many doctors were on vacation and hospitals were stretched beyond capacity 15,000 elderly citizens died."
Anonymous (March 25, 2008 @ 11:46pm):
I like how all of you agree with his proposals when they're framed as being the next step towards universal health care. These proposals are really reforms to all the free market to take effect. And applying basic constitutional principles to solve complex modern problems? Sounds like something right out of the Ron Paul playbook to me. The only thing any of these proposals have that are similar to universal healthcare are that they both involve the government taking action. Just because a plan allows everyone affordable coverage doesnt make it universal healthcare along the lines most democrats are advocating. This sounds more like John McCains healthcare reforms than those proposed by Obama or Clinton.
Anonymous (March 26, 2008 @ 9:01am):
"This sounds more like John McCains healthcare reforms than those proposed by Obama or Clinton."
All these plans are essentially the same. They vary in the details, but all call for more government intervention.
The basic alternative is government control or free-market: free-trade, or coercion. This is distinction is essential.
Our current system is heavily controlled and funded by government (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid). This is NOT free-market, it's a different form of government control from that of Canada, Sweden, etc. and thus has a different set of problems (e.g., high costs instead of shortages).
The solution is to allow freedom back into the medical industry, which means getting government out of the way.
Kim Morris (March 26, 2008 @ 5:22pm):
U.S. News and World Report issued today reports that a large majority of Americans surveyed support a free market health insurance system but want reform in issues that affect affordability. This topic is covered in http://short-term-medical-insurance.blogspot.com/2008/03/americans-oppose-health-insurance.html
Anonymous (April 11, 2008 @ 12:19pm):
In the process of researching and finalizing a thesis paper on universal health care and while the may much of what you all believe is true, some of your comments are myth based spread by insurance industry and self serving groups who call for health care reform as long as it is in their interest. So I will try to keep my comments short. Canada has problems, serious problems, but not as serious as ours. Don't look at te other 25 OECD countries that provide health care to theri residents as perfect models, only as models. If we are the richest nation in the world spending more per person than any other country on health care, why are we ranked so low in quality of care. Yeah, I have private insurace but I watch my employer bight the bullitt each year as the cost spirals 2 to 4 times the rate of any other commodity. Even gasoline hasn't increased percentage wise over the last 10 years as health care costs have. As to the government running it, private insurance has 7 times the overhead as medicare all due to marketing, administration and profit. 7 times. Sounds like the feds are doing better on their policy thsn private insurers are. By the way, you pay about 12.5% higher premiums if you have private insurance to cover the cost of the uninsured. There emergency care is already paid by tax dollars from....you!!! When they reach 65 the uninsured enter Medicare sicker, costing more paid for by whose Medicare contributions?....Yours. If I am going to pay for them, and I don't mind it any more than any other mandatory payment I make based on ability to pay, real estate taxes, personal property taxes, mandatory auto i8nsurance including an additional premium for uninsured an underinsured. They say an addtional 20 million of us with private insurance will lose it in the next 8 years when our employers no,longer offer it. Do we want to wait until crisis gets worse?
Anonymous (November 24, 2008 @ 3:26am):
For a variety of reasons, people may find it hard to pay for their medical obligations. During these time, people find short-term installment loans to be a neccessity. The American system of economics and of medicine are both in great periods of constraint. Regulation has hampered access to medical care and to financial options, such as short term installment loans. For emergencies, there should still be options open for both medicine and for finances. The Physicians Foundation recently released survey information where 78% of those surveyed responded that there are already too few family practitioners, and half of those surveyed are frustrated and angry with both government and HMO regulation and are looking to close their practices. As the population grows, the doctor to patient ratio is diminishing, and it will reach a breaking point. In a similar manner, if bank and government regulation find a way to eliminate the only other legal alternative option to short term emergency financing short term installment loans then the consumers will be stretched to the breaking point. Already many are too far in debt with credit cards, and no one wants to seek out a loan shark. Studies have been showing conclusively that the absence of payday installment loan lenders has only produced negative impact, such as the one by Jonathan Zinman, Assistant Professor of Economics at Dartmouth College. Doctors and consumers should be contacting their representatives and establishing their right to put their decisions over their finances and their health in their own hands, where it belongs.
Click to read more on <a title="What are Short Term Installment Loans?" href="http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/what-are-short-term-installment-loans/">Short Term Installment Loans</a>.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
