An Alternative Direction

This week, former congressman and 2004 presidential candidate Richard Gephardt shared some advice with the Obama administration regarding health care reform. The universal health care advocate who vehemently campaigned for universal coverage during the 2004 presidential race is now cautioning the Obama administration from making vast and extensive changes to the system. Gephardt predicts that any health care reforms will not pass this year and "is urging the White House to defer that goal until it enacts cost-saving reforms in health care delivery." He believes that President Obama is facing several looming obstacles, most notably how to finance universal coverage or simply health care reforms. As seen during former President Clinton's administration, the health care system comes down cost savings. This may seem ironic given that the United States pays much more in health care coverage than comparable industrialized countries with universal health care coverage. Unfortunately, the current economic situation places an even greater burden on the burning question: How does the president plan on financing health care reforms? Thus far, it appears as though President Obama is incorporating reforms into the economic recovery plan by casting it as "controlling the 'crushing cost of health care'" for those most affected by the poor economic situation. Even if the Obama administration can provide a convincing financial plan, Gephardt fears that universal coverage will meet opposition from both political parties. Despite Democratic majorities in Congress, Gephardt predicts that Republicans and moderate Democrats will not be receptive to a universal coverage plan. Health care reform will require strong leadership, patience and perseverance. Gephardt also advises that the President take incremental steps, such as implementing universal coverage for low-income workers. These small victories could pave the way for more sweeping reforms in the future.
Until a more efficient health care system is implemented, there are some steps that the health care industry could take that would improve the quality of care and reduce service costs. For example, many medical offices are switching to electronic medical records. One family doctor found that the electronic medical records made her office more productive and enabled her staff to spend less time searching for records and more time meeting the needs of the patients. She can also better monitor specific patient conditions. Another doctor reported that the electronic medical records system forced costs down by as much as 75%. Electronic medical records also make it easier to share patient information across medical offices. Unfortunately, some medical professionals are unwilling to make the switch because they cannot afford the start-up costs. Others have had negative experiences with the new technology and favor the traditional record keeping method. President Obama is encouraging the switch to electronic medical records as seen in the stimulus package, which allocates some money to transferring medical records to an electronic system. Most of the money will benefit "undeserved and rural areas." Despite its many advantages, the electronic system does not eliminate unwilling insurance companies that "use delaying tactics to avoid paying for care," a common frustration felt by many medical professionals. Still, it is evident that the electronic medical records system may be one incremental step on the way to cheaper health insurance that does not compromise the quality of service.
Successful health care reform will require more than material changes. According to a Yahoo News article, the uninsured population have not shown "collective power" or organized a united front against universal coverage opponents. If the constituency does not vocalize their opinions, lawmakers will be dissuaded by the cost of universal health care without factoring in the need for it. Not only do uninsured citizens not mobilize or lobby, most of the uninsured population is not represented in elections. "In the last election, only 10 percent of registered voters said they were uninsured." Historically, politicians respond to the needs of constituents that will help them secure reelection. If the uninsured population does not exercise the right to vote, politicians will be less receptive to their plight. There are several reasons why the uninsured do not show "collective power." First, many believe that being uninsured is a personal problem. Those with the misfortune of losing health coverage "often struggle alone instead of turning their frustration into political action." Second, many uninsured individuals are too busy trying to stay afloat and do not have the time or resources to mobilize politically. Third, research suggests that most uninsured middle class Americans will eventually find some medical coverage within several months. Therefore, the uninsured population does not have time to politically mobilize. Until all uninsured citizens become active in the political sphere, some grass-roots groups are lobbying in Washington for guaranteed coverage. However, those represented are typically insured and do not share the same plight as uninsured citizens.
Based on readings from the book, I understand that most citizens are not active in politics, particularly those that cannot afford to. If any progress is to made towards universal coverage, the uninsured population will have to vocalize their plight. I also agree with Gephardt regarding incremental steps. At this point, universal health care will only come to fruition if the idea is introduced gradually. I am hopeful that some of these changes will occur under the Obama administration.