wee-haggis
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2002
- Messages
- 2,175
Profit Motive: Whats Wrong with American Health Care?
by Kathleen Bushman
Edwards has the smile and the hair of a Kennedy, but will his health care policy alleviate the strangling cost, anxiety, and stress the working class is enduring as a consequence of our present system? Does Edwards, or any of the Democratic candidates, offer a health care plan that will relieve middle class suffering as the cost of health care has become the leading cause life disruption, behind home foreclosures and bankruptcies?
We Americans, by almost any standard, do not have the best health care system in the world, but we do hold bragging rights to the most expensive. Americans spend 50% more for their health care than the next most expensive country, and nearly twice the per person cost of the Canadian system.
Although Americans have by far the highest priced health care system in the world, no Americans should suffer under the delusion they enjoy the best health care system in the world. Citizens in 34 countries live longer than Americans. There are other methods of ranking a country's health care system, but to me the average life span of a country's citizens seems one of the very best methods. That fact alone should be a cause for a national sense of shame in the most powerful and fifth richest country in the world, but if that fact isn't bad enough here's another: "In mid-February (of 2004), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta also revealed that the U.S. infant mortality rate now stands at 7 as of 2002, backsliding from 6.8 in 2001." Out of 195 countries ranked by the United Nations, the United States is ranked below Canada, Cuba, Ireland, Italy, Brunei, and 32 other countries which have a lower infant mortality rate. Literally every country in Western Europe has a lower infant mortality rate and a longer life expectancy than the United States. So, even as the costs of America's health care system continue to soar, the quality continues to deteriorate.
I can cite the commonly known fact that nearly 46 million Americans have no health coverage at all and over 40 million more have only minimal coverage, but I seldom see media coverage about the millions with "deluded coverage". Many Americans only discover the gaps, co-pays, and exclusions of their health care plans when they experience a medical crisis. The LA Times recently reported that "One of the (California) state's largest health insurers set goals and paid bonuses based in part on how many individual policyholders were dropped and how much money was saved." If a family is at risk of losing a loved one, the family should not have to wonder whether their doctor's choice of treatment options will be restricted by which option the insurance company considers the most cost effective treatment.
A for-profit system whose first goal is profit does not put patient welfare before cost considerations. Thus, even those Americans who can afford the world's most expensive health care system are not guaranteed the best available health care. If a treatment plan is expensive but the best possible care for the patient, it will often be rejected to cut costs. A less effective but cheaper treatment plan will be chosen instead.
As this Alternet article states, "There are two criteria used to judge a country's health care system: the overall success of creating and sustaining health in the population, and the ability to control costs while doing so. A recent study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal compares mortality rates in private for-profit and non-profit hospitals in the United States. Research on 38 million adult patients in 26,000 U.S. hospitals revealed that death rates in for-profit hospitals are significantly higher than in non-profit hospitals: for-profit patients have a 2 percent higher chance of dying in the hospital or within 30 days of discharge. The increased death rates were clearly linked to "the corners that for-profit hospitals must cut in order to achieve a profit margin for investors, as well as to pay high salaries for administrators." "To ease cost pressures, administrators tend to hire less highly skilled personnel, including doctors, nurses, and pharmacists" wrote P. J. Devereaux, a cardiologist at McMaster University, the lead researcher. "The U.S. statistics clearly show that when the need for profits drives hospital decision making, more patients die."
"Conservatives love to trot out the theory that the soaring cost of America's health care is due to malpractice suits, when in fact only 0.46% of our total health care spending is spent upon awards, legal or underwriting costs - about the same as Canada's The administration of the health care system today consumes approximately 31% of the money spent for health care. The potential savings, as much as $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to every American without paying any more than we already do." ( A Healthy Nation Myths)
It seems evident to me that a country which spends billions on corporate welfare can well afford to consider some programs to benefit its citizens. If America is not a corporatocracy run solely for the benefit of companies such as Enron, Worldcom, Halliburton, Blackwater, and the media mega corporations, then it is time for the application of some good old American common sense. It is time for more regulation, and it is certainly time to at least see that our next Henry Ford lives past childhood.
Dennis Kucinich is the only Democratic candidate who offers a single payer not for profit health care system to cover all Americans. Since no other Democratic candidate's plan would stop the soaring cost of the for-profit system, there is only one plan America can afford: the Kucinich plan.
by Kathleen Bushman
Edwards has the smile and the hair of a Kennedy, but will his health care policy alleviate the strangling cost, anxiety, and stress the working class is enduring as a consequence of our present system? Does Edwards, or any of the Democratic candidates, offer a health care plan that will relieve middle class suffering as the cost of health care has become the leading cause life disruption, behind home foreclosures and bankruptcies?
We Americans, by almost any standard, do not have the best health care system in the world, but we do hold bragging rights to the most expensive. Americans spend 50% more for their health care than the next most expensive country, and nearly twice the per person cost of the Canadian system.
Although Americans have by far the highest priced health care system in the world, no Americans should suffer under the delusion they enjoy the best health care system in the world. Citizens in 34 countries live longer than Americans. There are other methods of ranking a country's health care system, but to me the average life span of a country's citizens seems one of the very best methods. That fact alone should be a cause for a national sense of shame in the most powerful and fifth richest country in the world, but if that fact isn't bad enough here's another: "In mid-February (of 2004), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta also revealed that the U.S. infant mortality rate now stands at 7 as of 2002, backsliding from 6.8 in 2001." Out of 195 countries ranked by the United Nations, the United States is ranked below Canada, Cuba, Ireland, Italy, Brunei, and 32 other countries which have a lower infant mortality rate. Literally every country in Western Europe has a lower infant mortality rate and a longer life expectancy than the United States. So, even as the costs of America's health care system continue to soar, the quality continues to deteriorate.
I can cite the commonly known fact that nearly 46 million Americans have no health coverage at all and over 40 million more have only minimal coverage, but I seldom see media coverage about the millions with "deluded coverage". Many Americans only discover the gaps, co-pays, and exclusions of their health care plans when they experience a medical crisis. The LA Times recently reported that "One of the (California) state's largest health insurers set goals and paid bonuses based in part on how many individual policyholders were dropped and how much money was saved." If a family is at risk of losing a loved one, the family should not have to wonder whether their doctor's choice of treatment options will be restricted by which option the insurance company considers the most cost effective treatment.
A for-profit system whose first goal is profit does not put patient welfare before cost considerations. Thus, even those Americans who can afford the world's most expensive health care system are not guaranteed the best available health care. If a treatment plan is expensive but the best possible care for the patient, it will often be rejected to cut costs. A less effective but cheaper treatment plan will be chosen instead.
As this Alternet article states, "There are two criteria used to judge a country's health care system: the overall success of creating and sustaining health in the population, and the ability to control costs while doing so. A recent study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal compares mortality rates in private for-profit and non-profit hospitals in the United States. Research on 38 million adult patients in 26,000 U.S. hospitals revealed that death rates in for-profit hospitals are significantly higher than in non-profit hospitals: for-profit patients have a 2 percent higher chance of dying in the hospital or within 30 days of discharge. The increased death rates were clearly linked to "the corners that for-profit hospitals must cut in order to achieve a profit margin for investors, as well as to pay high salaries for administrators." "To ease cost pressures, administrators tend to hire less highly skilled personnel, including doctors, nurses, and pharmacists" wrote P. J. Devereaux, a cardiologist at McMaster University, the lead researcher. "The U.S. statistics clearly show that when the need for profits drives hospital decision making, more patients die."
"Conservatives love to trot out the theory that the soaring cost of America's health care is due to malpractice suits, when in fact only 0.46% of our total health care spending is spent upon awards, legal or underwriting costs - about the same as Canada's The administration of the health care system today consumes approximately 31% of the money spent for health care. The potential savings, as much as $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to every American without paying any more than we already do." ( A Healthy Nation Myths)
It seems evident to me that a country which spends billions on corporate welfare can well afford to consider some programs to benefit its citizens. If America is not a corporatocracy run solely for the benefit of companies such as Enron, Worldcom, Halliburton, Blackwater, and the media mega corporations, then it is time for the application of some good old American common sense. It is time for more regulation, and it is certainly time to at least see that our next Henry Ford lives past childhood.
Dennis Kucinich is the only Democratic candidate who offers a single payer not for profit health care system to cover all Americans. Since no other Democratic candidate's plan would stop the soaring cost of the for-profit system, there is only one plan America can afford: the Kucinich plan.
)
.
