By
Like everyone else in D.C. health policy circles, I've
spent much of the last few days obsessively checking for updates on whether
there is a coherent plan emerging from the White House and Congress for moving
forward on health reform. Not yet,
which means that instead of rolling up my sleeves and thinking about how CCF
might best help to implement health care reform, I have some time to
contemplate all that would be lost if policymakers fail to move forward on
reform or decide to scale it back.
The worst thought is giving up on the opportunity to create a more compassionate and fair health care system.If reform passes, we can expect millions of children to gain coverage as their parents come forward to apply for insurance. These children no longer will go untreated for medical conditions that could affect their trajectory in life.As importantly, if reform passes, children no longer would have to see their parents and other adults in their lives struggling with the untreated medical conditions or the medical debt that can come with being uninsured. As my colleague, Martha Heberlein, has pointed out, the research is unequivocal on the point that children fare better when their parents also have insurance, presumably due to both the financial stability it confers and because it is tough to be an effective parent when coping with an untreated medical condition.
More immediately, the failure to pass reform would mean that children could still be denied coverage because they have a pre-existing coverage, such as asthma, diabetes, or autism. And, we wouldn't get the benefit of improvements to benefits for children contained in both reform bills, which means millions of children could miss out on hearing tests, eye tests, dental care, and, in more serious cases, developmental assessments that could dramatically affect their ability to grow and develop.
Finally, reform holds out the tantalizing prospect of stabilizing and strengthening the successful Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program, which together cover close to one in three of America's children. Medicaid is slated to receive a major investment of federal funds for extending coverage to more people, and, also, possibly, for increasing access by improving Medicaid reimbursement rates. If reform fails, we not only lose a valuable chance to stabilize and strengthen these programs, but face the prospect of states cutting back on Medicaid when fiscal relief runs out at the end of this year. We could see more states try to solve their state fiscal problems, in part, by putting uninsured children on waiting lists for coverage, as already has occurred in Tennessee and Arizona.
There has been a lot of rumbling about a scaled-back version taking on the necessary insurance reforms such as prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions, but this isn't a viable option. Many have pointed out that those reforms will actually increase insurance policy costs if we don't also expand those who are insured by making insurance coverage more affordable. If it were possible to ban pre-existing conditions without having the harder debate about broader health reform, it likely would have happened long ago.
I'm still optimistic that the nation's policymakers will find a way to move forward on health reform that offers pathways to affordable coverage for everyone. The cost of failing to do so is simply too high.
The worst thought is giving up on the opportunity to create a more compassionate and fair health care system.If reform passes, we can expect millions of children to gain coverage as their parents come forward to apply for insurance. These children no longer will go untreated for medical conditions that could affect their trajectory in life.As importantly, if reform passes, children no longer would have to see their parents and other adults in their lives struggling with the untreated medical conditions or the medical debt that can come with being uninsured. As my colleague, Martha Heberlein, has pointed out, the research is unequivocal on the point that children fare better when their parents also have insurance, presumably due to both the financial stability it confers and because it is tough to be an effective parent when coping with an untreated medical condition.
More immediately, the failure to pass reform would mean that children could still be denied coverage because they have a pre-existing coverage, such as asthma, diabetes, or autism. And, we wouldn't get the benefit of improvements to benefits for children contained in both reform bills, which means millions of children could miss out on hearing tests, eye tests, dental care, and, in more serious cases, developmental assessments that could dramatically affect their ability to grow and develop.
Finally, reform holds out the tantalizing prospect of stabilizing and strengthening the successful Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program, which together cover close to one in three of America's children. Medicaid is slated to receive a major investment of federal funds for extending coverage to more people, and, also, possibly, for increasing access by improving Medicaid reimbursement rates. If reform fails, we not only lose a valuable chance to stabilize and strengthen these programs, but face the prospect of states cutting back on Medicaid when fiscal relief runs out at the end of this year. We could see more states try to solve their state fiscal problems, in part, by putting uninsured children on waiting lists for coverage, as already has occurred in Tennessee and Arizona.
There has been a lot of rumbling about a scaled-back version taking on the necessary insurance reforms such as prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions, but this isn't a viable option. Many have pointed out that those reforms will actually increase insurance policy costs if we don't also expand those who are insured by making insurance coverage more affordable. If it were possible to ban pre-existing conditions without having the harder debate about broader health reform, it likely would have happened long ago.
I'm still optimistic that the nation's policymakers will find a way to move forward on health reform that offers pathways to affordable coverage for everyone. The cost of failing to do so is simply too high.
The House is going to vote on the health care bill on Sunday, and there are more Democrats crossing the line to vote for it. After initial opposition, Dennis Kucinich decided to vote yes and John Boccieri (D-OH) recently decided to vote yes as well. The CBO can't decide if will trim the deficit, or send the government running for payday loans if it passes, and truth be told, they have about as much accuracy as chance. Health care reform is indeed an important issue, but I'm still not entirely sold that we need government in on the action.