The US spends about twice as much for health care as the average among industrialized nations so says Dr. Steffi Woolhandler, an associate professor at Harvard Medical School. But those other industrialized countries provide comprehensive coverage for their entire populations, while the US leaves more than 47 million uninsured and millions more inadequately covered. The US performs poorly on major health indicators, such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates, in comparison.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• Comments
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

More Letters

• Letters: 'I will not vote for you, Cindy'
• Letters: Is Rev. Wright right?
• Taking on religion - Letter to the Editor

Share and Enjoy [?]

Newsvine
del.icio.us
Digg
Furl

Woolhandler is a co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Program (pnhp.org), which advocates a single-payer universal health-care plan such as HR 676, the "Medicare For All Act" proposed by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.). In a web conference hosted by BackboneCampaign.org, Woolhandler noted that a study by the Harvard Law School and the Harvard Medical School found that half of all bankruptcies are due to medical bills.

That is virtually unknown in Canada, which has single-payer coverage that takes care of major medical expenses. "And 76% of those medical-based bankruptcies in the US were families who had health insurance at the onset of their illness", Woolhandler noted. People either lost their jobs and their insurance as a result of their illness or, if they held onto their insurance, they were undone by required co-payments, deductibles and gaps in coverage.

We're already paying enough to cover everybody, she stated. One-third of health care dollars are eaten up in administrative costs, she said, as resources are squandered on paperwork and accounting. A single-payer plan that expands Medicare would result in savings estimated at $350 billion a year --- which would pay for the coverage of the uninsured, as well as fill in the gaps for the underinsured and those at risk of being put out of a job in the coming recession.

HR 676, which has 78 co-sponsors, has yet to get a hearing in the health subcommittee, despite polls that show that two-thirds of Americans support the idea of universal health care paid through taxes. The reason is that, in the absence of grassroots pressure, Congress members listen to insurance company and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists, who are willing to pay to keep the system just the way it is. When Republicans controlled Congress, they got two-thirds of the $31.2 million the insurance industry donated in 2006. Democrats are now getting their share, and they hate to alienate those donors.While the American Medical Association has tended to support the status quo, Woolhandler said that many physicians support single-payer as a way to simplify their practices. "We have excellent technology, but if folks can't afford to get into our offices, or if they can get into our offices but can't afford to pay for treatments, we can't do our jobs," she said. Instead of trying to patch our substandard private-insurance dominated health system, the best thing our government could do for working people, as well as businesses in the US, would be to expand Medicare to provide full-service health care for every American, regardless of employment.

Any serious reform of health care will require a public groundswell to prod Congress to go to war with the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries that are determined to protect the status quo. If we're heading into that fight, we might as well push for real reform. "When the public gets mobilized, we're able to beat back the lobbyists and the private interests, " Woolhandler said, "but if this is a backroom deal, the insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry will have a field day."

Don Barshay, Boulder