The Missing Piece in the Healthcare Reform Puzzle

Massive healthcare reform is currently in the works, and hopefully some good changes will be made. There are at least two unchangable certainties that will continue to increase the cost of healthcare, and while I'm in favor of a government option to compete with private companies, and the various other ideas to reduce costs, I believe one of the root causes of the rising cost of healthare are not being addressed. This is because, even though it directly affects the rise in healthcare, it is beyond the scope of healthcare policy. Yet, I believe, it is imperative that changes in this area need to happen in order to balance out the two certainties that will contintue to make costs rise.

Two things that are unchangable that affect cost:

-The baby-boomers are aging, which means that more and more people are going to need more and more care. Demand raises the cost, thus the price of healthcare is destined to increase and there is nothing we can do to change this. For more on this go here.

-New technology is always incredibly expensive when it comes out. I can buy an older cheaper Ipod and still listen to music; I don't need the latest version of it. But getting the newest and best healthcare could mean life or death, so the constantly developing technology in healthcare also means it will invariably become more expensive.

Some ways to decrease cost:

I think we need a national program to compete with private plans. I believe this because A. competition is good for consumers and B. as Paul Krugman recently argued, a national plan would keep private plans honest. Having a national plan would also ensure that everyone could have healthcare, and access to cost reducing preventative care. But here's the problem. I have good health insurance, yet I don't get a yearly check-up even though I know I should. The reality is that a lot of other people might not as well. Outside of forcing people to get check-ups, there is just no easy solution to this problem except for providers to create huge incentives for people who participate in preventative care. I know that if my premium would go way up if I didn't get my check-ups or screenings, I would start seeing a doctor regularly. Another problem is that people just might not get insurance even if they can afford it, which is why mandating healthcare is important. I understand the concern with "forcing" people to get healthcare, but realistically, everyone participating in this is important not only for the health of individuals, but for the economic well-being of the country.

But even with univeral coverage and prevention, there is still remains a missing component. Other countries aren't healthier than us because they have universal healthcare. They are healthier because they eat and live differently.

The cost-reducing issue in the healthcare debate that no one is talking about is the atrocious American diet. To deal with this, I would argue that taxes should be raised on junk food and foods that contribute to poor health, and we should stop subsidizing corn and soy beans and begin subsidizing crops that promote healthy diets. Part of the reason people are obese is because unhealthy food is cheap and healthy food is more expensive. Most fast food items, for example, are made from corn or soy products so they are cheap. And high-fructose corn syrup, a contributor to obesity, is in everything because corn is cheaper than sugar or natural sweeteners. Reducing subsidies on these crops and increasing subsidies on crops that promote a healthy diet; taxing unhealthy food; and educating the public more on a healthy diet might, by hitting Americans in their pocketbook, cause people to eat better and live healthier.

To cope with the large swath of our population getting older, we all need to live healthier lives. Eating healthier and preventative care will drive down costs making universal coverage affordable. If we tax junk food, that would generate additional revenue for the purpose of healthcare as well. The bottom line is whether it's the insurance companies or the masses, everyone needs to change their ways, but unfortunately I don't see much coming out of Washington on getting Americans to put down their Big Mac and pick up some veggies and whole grains.

Thoughts On Who Joe the Plumber's Been Checkin Out Lately...

This morning I came into work to Fox Noise Channel's ongoing coverage of the beauty queen homophobe's supposed persecution by the evil liberal media, and now apparently Donald Trump. Great way to start off a Monday! I hate to rant, but really, are Conservative Evangelicals really this hypocritical to make this chick their gay-marriage martyr after pornographic photos she apparently lied about taking have come to light?? And yes, I think they are pornographic, not "tasteful" as the moron on Fox described them as.

This whole shit storm beautifully illustrates how warped the Christian right's views on gay marriage really are. Gay marriage will supposedly destroy the sanctity and institution of marriage they argue, yet the type of "modeling" Miss Prejean has been involved in has done more to tarnish and destroy traditional marriage in this country than the gay rights lobbies could ever dream of. It just goes to show how dogmatic the issue of gay marriage has become with some Christian conservatives.

Conservatives are fighting a losing battle on this, and they need to just back out before they continue to look even more foolish. Marriage is not going anywhere, unless you believe something instituted by God can be destroyed by humans. We live in a pluralistic, secular, democracy. So gay couples should have the same rights heterosexual couples have, and if this country wants to call it marriage then so be it. I personally would disagree that the term "marriage" accurately describes the union of two homosexuals, but I also would disagree it accurately describes whatever that two day fling was that Brittany Spears had as well. The bottom line is that family will not be strengthened when we have a marriage amendment to the constitution, as conservative evangelicals so fervently believe. The family will begin to be strengthened when we start treating each other as human beings and not sex objects. And it will be strengthened when we actually see marriage as a covenant rather than a contract we can tear up when things get tough. Until these Christians recognize that, they're going to continue turning Americans off to their brand of Christianity. Not that that's a bad thing.

Obama. Abortion. Reduction?

It looks as if Obama is making good on one of his campaign promises-- to find common ground in the abortion debate and work to reduce abortions in a number of ways. This, I believe, is the only real solution to the problem, at least in this period of American history. Abortion is going to be legal and people are going to have sex, thus we need policies that will reduce abortions and make an abortion-free country seem possible.

Obama said recently: "I would like to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that result in women feeling compelled to get an abortion or at least considering getting an abortion." The Administration has brought together pro and anti abortion advocates to discuss ideas and goals in reducing the number of abortions and to get people talking rather than arguing. The White House will then consider ideas and recommendations that come from these talks. Ideas that are being discussed are: "improving education about use of contraception; better access to emergency contraception (which can be used after sex); improving education about sex, relationships and the "sacredness of sex"; stamping out employment discrimination against pregnant women; improving family-leave policies; and encouraging adoption." The Administration is especially interested in: "sex education; responsible use of contraception; maternal and child health; pregnancy discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere; and adoption."

This is encouraging for me and others who voted for Obama despite the protests of friends and family that Obama was a hard-core pro-abortion guy not really concerned about reducing abortions. Most frustrating for me is to read about pro-life people poo-pooing contraception. A global study of abortion conducted by the WHO found the lowest rates were in Western Europe due to its widespread availability of contraception. Fewer unwanted pregnancies means fewer abortions-- go figure!

I'm hopeful that this effort will produce some creative policy that the majority of pro-life and pro-choice people can get behind, and that the militants on both sides will continue to decrease.
Source

Making Lemonade: A Return to Responsibility?

I understand that there are people really suffering as a result of the recession, and I realize that I am fortunate. Even in the most economically depressed state in the union, I am one of those blessed to be prospering in this economy without a worry in the world about Anne or I losing our jobs. So I am aware how insensitive it may sound for me to say that I think this recession could turn out to be something positive. In fact, I'm not the only one who believes this, and I probably wouldn't be writing this if TIME hadn't validated my feelings. They have recently published a couple of issues highlighting some good things that are coming from this recession. In the April 6th edition, their cover reads: "The End of Excess: Why this crisis is good for America," and in the latest issue they have a story about the growing frugality in American consumers. In short, this crisis is good because it is forcing Americans to do things like become closer to friends and family, and is providing a good ass-kicking to our excessively consumeristic ways. It is exposing the danger of piling on debt and being financially irresponsible; and it comes at a time when we are becoming increasingly aware the need for sustainable forms of energy which has the potential of creating a stable new driver of our economy.

Along with highlighting the need for personal responsibility, this crisis may hopefully drive home the need for responsibility in the banking and financial sectors. Paul Krugman has a great piece entitled "Make Banking Boring" where he describes how banking and finance has gone through periods of excitement and boredom. Between WWI and 1929 the banking and finance sectors were "exciting," with those in the finance sector becoming fabulously wealthy, but with soaring debt. After the depression, regulation became tight, debt went down and banking became "boring." Yet this boring period yielded a time of great economic progress for the majority of Americans. However, in the 80's, regulation was lifted and banking became exciting again as those in the finance sector, once again, became fabulously wealthy and debt blew up. Ever since, the 80's extended into the 90's, and throughout the Bush years, as Americans piled on the debt and have lived excessively wealthy, consumeristic lives. Krugman argues that we must return to a tightly regulated system and restore responsibility. I agree, and my hope is that it will not only be the system that becomes more responsible and less excessive, but individuals as well.

But there are problems, and I think David Brooks has some valid points. In his column, "Big Spending Conservative," Brooks discusses how Obama has picked up on the responsibility theme as well. This should be good news that the president is driving home the message of responsibility and less excess, but Brooks points out his hypocrisy. Brooks writes:

"Moreover, for an administration that puts responsibility at the center, it is not itself very responsible. Federal spending is the leverage the administration uses to gain control over sector after sector, and yet this money is all borrowed.
Obama imposes hard choices on others, but has postponed his own. He presented an agenda that bleeds red ink a trillion dollars at a time. Now he seems passive as Congress kills his few revenue ideas (cap and trade) and spending cuts (agricultural subsidies). Huge fiscal gaps are opening this decade that can’t be closed by distant entitlement reform. They can’t be closed by cynical Potemkin cuts, a few million at a time"

I am all for government intervention and regulation. I am all for health care reform. I am all for "green jobs." I am all for good, effective social programs. But I am also all for fiscal discipline, and that is one thing I do not see coming from the administration or congress. Now, yes, the tax cuts will expire, and I think that is a good thing, but there needs to be some spending cuts as well, and more than a piddly 100 million dollars.

Technical Difficulties and the G-20

I haven't quit blogging here, my mind just hasn't been focused on politics and what's going on in the world lately. Also, my mouse on my laptop is dead and my other computer is incredibly slow, so that has made using a computer incredibly undesirable, as using my laptop consists of me hitting tab a million times trying to land on the item I want to click on.

But anyways... In politics and current events, I think the president is doing a decent job. It was refreshing to see him at the G-20 and know that the other leaders there were listening to us again and cared what we had to say. It was relieving to hear him say he was there to listen and not lecture, but also acknowledging that anti-Americanism in Europe had often gotten out of hand and that America has done a great deal of good in the world. I know we didn't get everything we wanted there, but hopefully restoring and building relationships will go a long way in getting things we want down the road.

You Are What You Eat- Part 5

From what I know about him, Polan is a secular Jew, but I found the final portion of his book very spiritual and moving. He quotes the Christian writer, Wendall Berry, numerous times and even discusses why it is good to say a blessing.

Eating is a tremendously spiritual, sacred practice. Jesus knew this-- one of Christianity's main practices centers on eating. What we eat exemplifies our stewardship of creation. And not only of the created world around us, but the creation God has imparted us to care for-- our own bodies. Our skyrocketing health care costs are a direct consequence of our horrendous failure as stewards of creation. I would argue that if we ate differently, our health care crisis would go away.

Secondly, eating is spiritual because eating is relational. Creation depends on us to steward it well, and we depend on creation for sustenance. All of us depend on the same planet. In that way, we are all interconnected. Polan talks about the importance of going to farmer's markets, not just to get good food, but to meet the person feeding you. He argues that there is something important about the farmer looking the consumer in the eye when he sells him some produce. It's a lot harder to sell salmonella-infected vegetables to someone when you have to meet and greet the buyer.

Anne and I have come to the conclusion that eating well is something worth spending the extra cash on. Why wouldn't you spend a little more on something you put into your body on a constant basis? People research their new T.V. much more than they research what they eat. That is incredible to me. What's more incredible though is how much of our health problems-- and I would argue social problems-- are rooted in or linked to the ways greed and selfishness have affected our diet and food production. The good news is that the solutions are simple: eat food as God intended it to be, and develop eating practices that have been around since the dawn of civilization. The bad news is that our culture and economy want to create food products that are cheap and quick to make. So just like living a life that is, morally, how things were intended to be goes against the ways of the world around us, it seems that eating how we were intended to does as well.

You Are What You Eat- Part 4

I'm just skimming the surface of what Polan has to say about the reductionist science of nutritionism, processing, and the Western diet and all of the diseases that come with it. I found his research to be eye-opening, logical and clear-headed. But this book isn't just about how screwed up the American diet is, it's about changing one's eating habits as well. So what does Polan suggest? Polan's solution isn't focused on teaching the reader to eat foods containing only certain nutrients, or to only eat organic or become vegan. Instead he offers a simple mantra: Eat Food, Mostly Plants, Not too Much.

Eating food means eating whole foods, or foods made with a minimum amount of easily recognizable ingredients. "Mostly plants" is obvious. People should eat mainly fruits, grains and vegetables. This is the one I struggle most with because while I like vegetables, I generally tend to eat them the least. Concerning meat, Polan argues that meat should be more of a condiment than a main dish. He also points out that commercially produced animals are pumped full of hormones and pharmaceuticals, and eat horrible diets. On top of the dreadful conditions these animals live in (which is reason enough not to consume them), and all the crap they are given, the person who eats them is eating what they have eaten. In other words, all of the horrible things put into these animals is put into you when you eat them. Thus, Polan argues that it is best to buy meat that has been "grass finished," or better yet, to hunt and kill your own meat. It is true that animals who have been raised in cruelty-free environments and have been fed healthy food produce much more expensive meat, but if one is eating much less meat, then the price shouldn't be a huge issue.

The last part of the mantra, "Not too much" is also obvious. Americans are notoriously "big eaters," and-- go figure-- Americans are notoriously obese. Polan suggests that Americans should take up eating practices of other (healthier!) cultures, eat smaller portions and take more time to eat. Taking more time allows the body to digest the food and let the eater know he is full. When we shovel food into our mouth our body doesn't have the time to let us know we are full before it's too late. Polan also says that we need to not eat alone. He says that food should be a communal experience where relationships are strengthened and bonds are made. It's interesting to point out that a gateway into a culture is its diet. Food is often a great starting point for people of different countries or cultures to begin learning about one another. It is something we all have in common.