Why the current healthcare reform package is doomed to fail...

As discussed earlier, one of the largest costs of healthcare that we Americans share is the cost attributable to chronic diseases such as heart disease, stroke, and diabetes. A large percentage of those cases are situations in which the disease was almost certainly the result of a lifestyle choice, whether it be smoking, obesity, malaise, etc. That means lifestyle choice is a major cost, if not the major cost, of healthcare today. In private insurance, there is a disincentive for people, and that is the increased cost of health care premiums based upon poor lifestyle choices. even in large corporations where seemingly everyone has the same costs, an employer can realize significant savings by supporting efforts to increase the health of its workers. Many companies now offer significant incentives for a healthier lifestyle to its employees.

Now comes KennedyCare. In the bill, the cost borne by each of us will depend entirely from our economic situation. Those in higher tax brackets will pay more taxes to support this program. Okay, thats just like any other tax, so what is the problem? The problem is that this is a bandaid over a gaping chest wound. Instead of disincentivizing poor lifestyle habits, through the means of taxation, poor habits will actually be subsidized. Thats right. No more economic disincentives.

Now, let's look at the affect this healthcare bill will have. Because poor lifestyle choices will now be subsidized, the standard of health in our country will continue to fall, which will mean increased costs, increased taxes. Those taxes cannot all be borne by the rich and will cause increased taxes on middle and low income earners. What does this mean? Unhealthy food is usually cheaper than healthy food. With less money to spend, low wage earners will increasingly turn to unhealthy foods to eat, as their budgets are increasingly being eroded by increasing taxes supporting unhealthy lifestyles.

That means that an increasing number of people will suffer from chronic illnesses, thus increasing the costs more, causing a vicious cycle. How did this happen?

It happened purely because our representatives failed to identify and correct the real problems, and instead, looked blindly at idealogy to solve the problem. Without solving the problem of chronic illness first, any healthcare reform may end up causing more harm than good.

The Importance of the 10th Amendment

As we look at what America has become over the last 20 years or so, I often wonder if what we have now is what the founders intended. Both Republicans and Democrats have done a really nice job of consolidating power in Washington. They have successfully funneled pretty much all money, and the resulting power, from lobbyists, big money donors, special interest groups, etc. to Washington. There is some state activity, but it pales in comparison.

I cannot imagine that the founders wanted this. There must have been a reason for the 10th Amendment, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

That one sentence, in its simplicity, is a profound statement of rebuke to a centralized power structure. The founders knew that in order for the young US to succeed, both in its infancy and its prime, there must be a balance of power. They put these balances throughout the Constitution. To balance the federal government, the founders separated the federal government into three equal branches: Legislative Branch; Executive Branch; and Judicial Branch. To balance the people, the founders set forth a document that provides the foundation of a quid pro quo rights structure; that is, all else being equal, for me to have a right, I must accept that you have the same right.

That leaves the balance between the federal government and state governments. This is just as important as the rest of the balances in the Constitution. The founders were part of a group of settlers that fought against tyrannical rule. Their foresight on realizing the dangers of having a single government structure with unchecked power was amazing. Our recent history is replete with examples of what happens when a central government goes unchecked. Between the world worlds and other wars, Americans have died fighting the result of a centralized power structure.

Yet, we quietly or ignorantly have allowed the very same thing to happen in our own country. We have a federal government that is almost complete in its consolidation of power. we have a white house that sends letters to governors of states having congress people that oppose "reform". We have a legislature that, instead of acknowledging opposing views, calls protestors racist nazi warmongers (not caring that several have been veterans). We have congress people saying flat out that they would vote against the interests of their own constituents. We have states being forced to give up control of their own government, lest they be chastized for not taking "free money" in a bailout.

This is just the surface, and it is not the end. Until we have a party that believes in the value and need of the 10th Amendment, this consolidation of power will not end.

Health Care Common Sense Solution

Much has been made about the need to reform healthcare, and this author will not dispute that the costs are increasingly becoming burdensome for Americans. But, there needs to be a common sense approach to the situation, not the drinking from the firehose methodology currently employed.

This is what I mean. The cost of healthcare is an extremely complex set of inputs that not only affect the total cost of healthcare, but affect each other. Throwing money at the problem, either through co-ops or government-run plan may not alleviate this burden (what you dont pay in premiums, you pay in taxes), and may even make things worse by hiding the true issues in healthcare. As this author stated before, its like putting a bandaid on a bleeding puncture chest wound without taking the time for exploratory surgery to find and fix possibly larger issues.

Unfortunately, our representatives in Washington dont see it that way. Apparently, they feel that if they throw enough money at the system, it will end up working.

It wont.

Here is the common sense solution: identify key, major inputs to the system, work on a smaller scale to fix those inputs, and determine how those changes affect the entire system. In other words, work on a manageable, measurable micro level rather than the macro level being tried now. We know why Washington will not do that. Its because it would not appease their respective special interest groups.

Here is a possible solution. Chronic disease are one of the largest costs in the total healthcare cost. The "sickness" of each affects all of us. As we are a healthier nation, the costs of chronic diseases will go down. Chronic disease, such as cardiovascular disease (heart and stroke) and diabetes are largely treatable and in most cases, preventable. Chronic diseases increase the costs of healthcare because they create a significant and prolonged burden on our healthcare system. Seven out of 10 Americans that die each year die of chronic illnesses.

The costs of chronic illness upon our healthcare system is measureable. The common sense solution would be to attempt to affect this micro input, measure the change, then adjust as necessary. Instead of spending trillions of our childrens' and grandchildrens' money, lets get to the street level of the issue.

Some facts provided courtesy of the CDC (www.cdc.gov)


Cost-Effectiveness of Prevention
For every $1 spent on water fluoridation, $38 is saved in dental restorative treatment costs.

Implementing proven clinical smoking cessation interventions would cost an estimated $2,587 for each year of life saved, the most cost-effective of all clinical preventative services.

For each $1 spent on the Safer Choice Program (a school-based HIV, other STD, and pregnancy prevention program), about $2.65 is saved on medical and social costs.

Every $1 spent on preconception care programs for women with diabetes, can reduce health costs by up to $5.19 by preventing costly complications in both mothers and babies.

Implementing the Arthritis Self-Help Course among 10,000 individuals with arthritis will yield a net savings of more than $2.5 million while simultaneously reducing pain by 18 percent among participants.

A mammogram every 2 years for women aged 50–69 costs only about $9,000 per year of life saved. This cost compares favorably with other widely used clinical preventive services.

How to Change Washington

The bipartisan public fury over the healthcare debate is merely the latest indication that we are being governed not by our elected representatives, but rather, by the two parties. Both the republican and democratic parties have entrenched themselves so deeply with companies and special interest groups with money that the average citizen is not even a cog in the machine, but merely a bystander. The other day, a Democratic representatives stated flat out that he would vote against the interests of his constituency. At one point in time, the term representative meant just that, represent. It does not anymore.

This is not to say that there are not good democrats and republicans out there. Despite what each side wishes you to believe, there are good people on each side of the aisle. These people, though few in number, come to Washington and their own state capitals hoping to do something, to make what they feel is a positive change. Unfortunately, they are a very small minority.

How do we change it? There have been a lot of debates about how term limits is going to solve the problem, but there is exactly a zero percent chance of either party making an effort to pass any law that limits the flow of money and power into the system. The grooves are too deep and the skids are too greased for any person in the two current major parties to attempt to make a change.

How do we do it? We have to start anew. A new party, though minor, needs to make the bold statement that they will not operate in a manner to the detriment of their constituents. It is the only way to bring the power back to the states, to the communities, and most importantly, to the people.

Every person, EVERY person is important. Our voices should ring louder than the flood of money going into the parties. Our representatives should look to us first for direction. They should feel that they are accountable to us. When our representatives discount and deride our dissenting voices, they trample upon the Constitution.

National Healthcare

We need to step back and analyze what is going on. The common sense solution would be to get the facts before acting. The current reform effort is being done with idealogical glasses on and without the data necessary to form a good solution.

First, we should have some basis for what the price of healthcare should be. Should it be less than what we are paying? Should it be more? We do not know because both parties are driving the healthcare debate based upon their idealogy instead of focusing on find a common sense solution to the problem. Insurance companies do not operate in a free market. They are some of the most regulated companies in the world.

Second, we need to understand the effects of immigration, poverty, obesity, smoking, etc, on the issue of healthcare. Healthcare does not exist in a vacuum but is influenced by a multitude of factors. If we can work to solve the other problems, will it alleviate or remove concerns about healthcare? We do not know.

What is happening now is like putting a bandaid over a gaping chest wound. Without spending the time and effort to truly survey the issue, the effects could be worse than if we did nothing at all. We will think that we would have solved the problem and move on, when in fact, the problem will grow.

Wouldn't it make sense to understand the problem before we spend $1 Trillion, or more, to fix it?

Common Sense

This is the first post for the Georgia Modern Whig Party. The Georgia Modern Whig Party was formed in response to the continued actions, and inaction, of the two majority parties. As the two parties have moved to their ideoligical extremes, the majority of Americans have been left without a viable party to support. For the past two decades, a large majority of us have been left voting not for who we want, but against who we don't want. Further, Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated with each party's inability to look beyond their idealogical tenants and find the best solution out there. The parties refuse to spend the time to understand the fundamental issues to be addressed and instead default to standard ways of attempting to solve a problem. They refuse to do so because they feel that their position would be undermined if the solution was found partly or wholly outside of their ideological. Finally, the parties refuse to enact changes in a way in which the effects of the law are measurable. In other words, not only do they fail to take the time to understand the fundamental issues (removing all biases and idealogies), they enact incomplete laws that do not provide for a means to measure the effect of the law. The parties again do this because 1) they do not understand the nature of the problem and 2) by making the results immeasurable, they will never have to concede error.

I hope that you take the time to learn more about the Georgia Modern Whig Party. In future postings, I will discuss the origins of the Modern Whig Party, how the Georgia Modern Whig party develops Servant-Leaders, and how our party structure in Georgia specifically provides for the ability of each member of the GMWP to become actively involved in the affairs of the GMWP.