Why Do We Need Health Care Reform? Don't Ask George Will

Share/Save Share this

One of the things I hope to do with my post is to call out misleading statements and statistics, outright lies and illogical assertions by opponents of meaningful health care reform—and to rat out the front groups that insurers and other special interests are funding to kill reform or, failing that, shape it to their benefit.

I'm starting with a biggie, conservative author and columnist George Will, who suggests in his June 28 column in The Washington Post that, because of the complexity and expense of reforming the American health care system, maybe we would be better off just leaving well enough alone.

Well enough? For him, maybe. He's got a great gig at the Post and as a TV network pundit, and he has sold lots of books, so he probably doesn't have to worry, as most other Americans do, about being just one layoff away from joining the 50 million other men, women and children in the ranks of the uninsured. And even if the Post gave him a pink slip this afternoon, chances are he has stashed enough away that he can afford to shell out the nearly $13,000 that the average annual premium for decent family coverage costs these days (and that was in 2007).

The median household income in this country is just about $50,000. I'm betting it has been a few years since Will faced paying more than a fourth of his family's annual income—before taxes—just to cover the health insurance premiums. More and more of us also face paying thousands more of our hard-earned dollars in out-of-pocket expenses before the coverage we pay so dearly for actually kicks in. If Will and other critics of real reform just did a little simple math, they would understand why the number of people without insurance is so high and growing so rapidly, and why at least 25 million more of us are now under-insured.

After telling us we might live to regret trying to reform our dysfunctional non-system, Will makes this assertion:

"Most Americans do want different health care: They want 2009 medicine at 1960 prices."

Yeah, that would be nice, and it sure makes for a great quip, but no one I know expects that. Maybe he knows "most Americans" better than I do, but I doubt it. Instead, I suspect he sees the world in much the same way insurance company executives see it from their spacious offices, the windows of their chauffeur-driven limos and the corporate jets that fly them comfortably over "most Americans." When you're at that altitude, it's hard to get a real fix on what most Americans want, much less what so many of them so desperately need.

To be fair and perfectly honest, I saw the world that way too for most of the 20 years I worked inside the insurance industry. The more money I made and the more perks I was given, the less I thought about the hardships many people face who are not as privileged. It took seeing thousands of people standing in the rain in long lines to get care in a barn just a few miles from where I grew up to finally get it.

It is true, as Will notes, that many Americans enrolled in employer-sponsored health insurance plans have been able to rely on their employers to pay the lion's share of the premiums. What is also true, but not mentioned in his column, is that fewer and fewer Americans can get coverage through their employers these days, and that of those who can, most are now having to pay a larger share of the premiums and much higher out-of-pocket expenses.

According to a recent Wall Street Journal story, the number of small employers offering coverage has dropped from 61 percent to 38 percent since 1993. And the way insurers and employers are dealing with medical inflation is to shift more of the financial burden onto the shoulders of working men and women.

Insurers and their ideological allies, like Grace Marie Turner of the Galen Institute and Betsy McCauaghey of the Hudson Institute, both of whom Will cites as experts in his column and both of whose organizations are corporate funded, say this is a good thing because, they contend, Americans have been insulated for far too long from the real costs of health care.

That's easy for someone to say who has never had to file for bankruptcy, as millions of Americans have, because the insurance coverage they were counting on didn't come close to covering their medical bills when they got sick or had an accident. And it's easy for a rich, famous and out-of-touch columnist to callously content that all Americans really want is 2009 medicine at 1960 prices, so let's just call the whole thing off.


Wendell Potter is the Senior Fellow on Health Care for the Center for Media and Democracy in Madison, Wisconsin.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Two points

1. One question everyone should be asking: Do I want a bureaucrat who is paid based on an increase of medial care provided to determine whether or not I get cared for or do I want a bureaucrat who is paid based on the number of claims denied to determine whether or not I get medial care? Right now, we have the latter.

We should accept that SOMEONE other than ourselves and our doctor will always oversee a medical care program. Stating that a "bureaucrat" will be in charge of our health care is like saying "the sky is blue."

2. Every commentator, pundit, columnist who wants to write about healthcare issues should disclose the following:
- Who is your health insurance company?
- Who is paying for your policy?
- What is your annual contribution?
- What is your annual deductible?
- Can this policy be revoked due to a particular illness or accident?

Then, the reader or listener can determine for him/herself how credible the person is.

More health care opinions: http://www.dogwalkblog.com/2009/06/24/insurance-disclosures/

You're redeeming yourself Wendell

I really enjoyed watching your interview with Bill Moyers. Sounds like you had a real life changing experience near where you grew up. Now that you're retired and I'm sure, very well off financially, you are doing the right thing and speaking truth to power. I hope that you have maintained some strong "connections" within the health care insurance industry so that you can continue to give us the inside scoop on what they are up to in order to scuttle REAL reform in health care, preferably with a single-payer system. No legislator should settle for anything less than a very robust public option. Great idea to poke George Will here. He should stick to writing about baseball. He IS out of touch with everyday Americans.

Wendell Potter's analysis of George Will column

Potter states that Will suggests we should leave well enough alone. That is not true, Potter has, seemingly intentionally, misstated what Will said.

Will's column analyzed many aspects of the costs of health care, and the impending crisis caused by massive deficits, and the massive costs of health reform, and specifically said:
"The public, its attention riveted by the fiscal train wreck of trillion-dollar deficits for the foreseeable future, may be coming to the conclusion that we should leave bad enough alone".

Notice, Will did not say to leave well enough alone. He specifically used different terminology, which Potter ignored.

Will also cited polls and surveys on what Americans are willing to pay for health care. Potter's column is utterly misleading as to what Will said.

I think we need health care changes, but Potter's analysis of the Will column is so incomplete and misleading, that Potter hurts the chances for health care reform.

Potter comes across more and more as a man who made a lot of money in the insurance business, as an executive, and now sees he can make a lot more as a whistle blower.

Let's have a real analysis of what critics of health care reform as proposed by many Democrats, not a misstatement of what these critics say.

Potter's analysis of what Will says, versus what Will actually says, is tantamount to lies by Potter.

Who's misleading?

Here's the exact quote, which comes in the first paragraph incidentally, a fact that strongly suggests you were depending on the gullible not to check your own veracity....which is of course, lacking.

"In the beginning," says a character in a Peter De Vries novel, "the earth was without form and void. Why didn't they leave well enough alone?" When Washington is finished improving health care, Americans may be asking the same thing."
George F. Will - A Regrettable 'Fix' on Health Care - washingtonpost.com (4 August 2009)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062603457.html
http://tinyurl.com/nnujrj

Do tell.

I think we need health care changes...

Such as? I'd be interested to hear some specifics.

...[A]nd now sees he can make a lot more as a whistle blower.

So, who's going to pay him all that dough? Who, but the industry he left, can afford to? CMD for one isn't exactly rolling in it.

VA healthcare works

It's disturbing to me that whenever government healthcare is mentioned, the speaker usually refers to the Medicare system. This seems to me to be a misnomer. Medicare is an insurance system - not healthcare. The VA, on the other hand, is a highly functional system of providing health care. While any system is only as good as the individuals who make it function, the care provided by the VA healthcare system is based upon established standards of care and best practices. As a result, patients receive quality and timely care. As a veteran who has experienced employer-sponsored healthplans as well as self-pay options, I am grateful to have access to "government healthcare" - it's the most coordinated and proactive care I've ever received!
What is needed seems to me to be a reform of the way we receive care. If what care I can receive is dependent upon how much profit some other entity obtains, then my life is being treated as a commodity - or property - the quality of which depends upon whether someone else can make money as a result. Is this not a perverse form of human trafficking? To profit from the life, health (or lack thereof)of another? It is very different to make a profit on a service, or a product. But when profit is intimately linked to another's physical/mental being, then I think our morality is what needs reform.

VA Health Care System

TF, you think the VA health system works? Are you serious?
..
You are correct when you say that the VA system is government-run health care and is unlike Medicare's insurance only system. That is the problem.
..
Fact is, the US Government can't even deliver mail at a profit. Come on folks! Wake up!
..
If you like the VA system, you apparently think that rationed health care (Priority Groups), means testing for benefits, and sub-standard procedures (dirty colonoscopy tubes) is the way to go. If the VA system is so good, why don't they do away with TriCare, Medicare, and other government health programs and use the VA system?
..
The VA health system is what universal care run by the government would become....a disaster. Even governments with government-run health care are starting to see that.
..
A few of the facts: http://www1.va.gov/opa/Is1/1.asp

"If the VA system is so

"If the VA system is so good, why don't they do away with TriCare, Medicare, and other government health programs and use the VA system?"

What?? Are you not awake or just what do you think we've been trying to do all these years? And apparently your the last conservative in the US to know that the VA system is widely agreed upon, and by no less a partisan voice as Bill Kristol, to be the superior health-care system in the USA.
I ask you, do you seriously think Aetna would be footing the bill for the tens of thousands of soldiers coming back with injuries that run the entire course of possibilities if they were allowed to drop them? Like hot potatoes they would!

Look. Why is the US the only First World government not to adopt it? Cold War rhetoric you've swallowed during the fight against communism. Period.

You are now victims of your own BS! Rather fitting in a Machiavellian/Twilight Zone sort of way, doncha think? I sure do.

The government could fix the VA easily...

...just end these wars and use the money to deliver adequate funding to the VA on time.

If you like the VA system, you apparently think that rationed health care (Priority Groups), means testing for benefits, and sub-standard procedures (dirty colonoscopy tubes) is the way to go.

One more time -- how the hell can anyone still say for-profit insurers don't ration care? The difference is, they do it to maximize their bottom line, not to try to deliver what care they can, with the resources they have, to the greatest number of patients.

And if you want to convince people that a government-run system must necessarily perform as badly as our resource-starved VA, you'll have to start by supplying some dirty-colonoscopy stories from the UK, France, et al., and keep going from there.

Fact is, the US Government can't even deliver mail at a profit. Come on folks! Wake up!

You're too quick to say "can't." Not subsidizing junk mail on the backs of first- and second-class users would be a good start.

Govt-run doesn't work!

Government run healthcare will kill the world's greatest healthcare! What is wrong with you people? Do you honestly believe a government that can't even run Medicaid and Medicare now can handle coverage for the entire population???? Come on...wise up. This is a disaster waiting to happen. And why the rush?? Are you afraid that if you don't cram it down our throats now you'll miss the opportunity because the majority of Americans will figure out how they are getting shafted and then you'll never get it done??? This country better wake up before we lose every single liberty that our forefathers fought and died for....hello??? Anyone listening????