If I could turn the page in time then I’d rearrange just a day or two. Close my, close my, close my eyes. But I couldn’t find a way, so I’ll settle for one day to believe in you. Tell me, tell me, tell me lies. Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies.
How do you change lanes if health insurance is an issue?
Posted by: Susan Marshall | Posted in: Health, Personal resources, Social/political Activism, Susan's MusingsMonday, October 20, 2008
Why must we always ride a divided highway? Torn in two directions; speedin’ outa sight. Divided highway stranded at the crossroads of what’s wrong and who’s right. Divided highway cuttin’ through the darkness.
Divided We Fail
Have you thought about making a change in your life—either to retire, slow down, or pursue new interests—but the issue of health care and health insurance rears its ugly head? If so, you’re not alone.I personally have dealt with the problem of affordable health care and was reminded that I was only one of many when Jane and I were interviewing boomers for our book.
In Changing Lanes we profiled one couple, Becky and Richard Ebbert, outlining how they dealt with the issue of midlife reinvention. They desperately wanted to slow down, but maintaining their health insurance was critical. So they chose to work within the National Parks system for nine months of each year. Merely living within the borders of Zion National Park caused them to focus on the wellness aspects of their lives but they also earned spending money, received those all-important health benefits, and still had three months to travel around.
You’ve probably seen the commercials from AARP on the subject. They’ve created a movement called “Divided We Fail.” I was intrigued enough to go to their website. I think they’ve done a nice job of summarizing what the solution should look like, and rather than paraphrase, I’ve extracted a portion of their “Divided We Fail Platform:
We believe that the opportunity to have access to health care and long-term financial security is a basic need that all Americans share. We believe it is the foundation for future generations. We believe all Americans should have access to affordable, quality health care. We believe… All Americans should have access to affordable health care, including prescription drugs, and these costs should not burden future generations. We believe… Wellness and prevention efforts, including changes in personal behavior such as diet and exercise, should be top national priorities. We believe… Americans should have choices when it comes to long-term care - allowing them to maintain their independence at home or in their communities with expanded and affordable financing options. |
They go on to promote their beliefs on long-term financial security, like shoring up social security, creating incentives to save, and requiring financial management education.
Of course, how we create the policies and programs that arrive at that end-state is an entirely different matter. And that’s partially what this election is all about. Fortunately, voters 50 and older tend to take the time to understand the issues better and I suspect those of us who’ve already passed that mile marker will be key to the 2008 elections.
On the Divided We Fail website (an AARP program), they profess their goal: “…for all our members to vote, based on the knowledge of the candidates’ views and their willingness to work collaboratively on the nation’s problems.”
So my public service to you is to provide information about the candidates’ health care proposals. To do that, I went to the National Health Law Program’s website. They’ve joined with the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative to jointly run The Human Right to Health Program. The non-partisan program supports organizations and advocates in their efforts to advance the human right to health care in the U.S.
I find it interesting that they use the perspective of human rights principles as a way of offering a roadmap for policymakers. Their objective is to “protect health care as a public good, ensuring that everyone in the United States is able to get the care they need.” I hadn’t thought about that line of thinking until Tom Brokaw asked Obama and McCain in the second Presidential debate: “is health care a right or a responsibility?” In my research for this blog, I noticed that in a 2007 survey, 72% of the public felt strongly that health care should be considered a human right.
I’m beginning to understand that both nominees’ health reform ambitions are still formed in the context of a market-based approach that treats health care plans as a commercial product. And according to the Program’s assessment, both men’s proposals are flawed, with “Obama’s plan potentially increasing access to insurance coverage” and “McCain’s plan likely to ration necessary care.” In other words, they reinforce the status quo.
When you think about it, it’s hard to ague with the notion that protecting health is far from what drives today’s health care industry.
So, a few summary points from The Human Right to Health Program report:Using a pure “human rights” lens, they conclude the following (grades of A, B, C):
| Human Rights Principles | Obama’s Plan | McCain’s Plan |
| Universal Access to Care | B | C |
| Affordable Access to Care | B | C |
| Equitable Access to Care | C | C |
| Comprehensive Access to Care | B | C |
| Availability of care infrastructure/services everywhere | B | C |
| Acceptability and dignity of care | B | C |
| Quality of health care | B | B |
Looking further in the report, I found a glaring difference when it comes to the specific impact on women. Here’s what the plan had to say:
McCain’s Plan allows insurers to discriminate against women by denying coverage or charging higher premiums. The availability of dependent coverage through a spouse’s employers may be reduced, but no viable alternative is offered. Without needs-based subsidies, women are disadvantaged in the more expensive individual market, as they use more services due to reproductive health needs, and continue to earn less than men for the same work.
Obama’s Plan requires insurers to issue policies to all applicants, regardless of health risks. However, it allows higher premium prices based on gender, and does not address the issue of dependent coverage.
The full report is only 12 pages. If you want to better understand the difference between the two presidential candidates as it pertains to health care, go to A Human Rights Assessment of the Presidential Nominees’ Health Plans.
I’ll leave you to your reading! But, most importantly, make sure you VOTE on November 4. It might just make your lane change closer to a reality. And if you have a story about your challenges in finding affordable and comprehensive health care and its impact on your lane change, let us know.
Go OBAMA!!
