Oregon state Senator Ron Wyden was in town this week, and I was lucky enough to share a meal with this man of action. Senator Wyden has served Oregon in the US Senate since 1996. He sits on several senate committees—including the important Finance Committee and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee (both of which he chairs). What is perhaps even more noteworthy is that Senator Wyden and a group of bi-partisan senators recently proposed the Healthy Americans Act.
If you know me, you know that I regularly grumble about the “health care” discussion. It seems to focus far too much on payer models (who is paying for what) than it does on health. The US is currently 37th by the World Health Organization (WHO) when it comes to health care. We are behind Costa Rica, and just ahead of Slovenia; France is ranked number 1. No offense, but for a country like the US that spends more than $2.4 trillion on health care each year, we ought to be doing better than less developed countries! In life expectancy, we’re a little better. We’re 24th, with US males living an average of 67.5 years, and US females living an average of 72.6 years.
So what does the Healthy Americans Act do for us? Well, this is another payer model that would guarantee that “all Americans receive private affordable health coverage that can never be taken away.” I rolled my eyes at Senator Wyden when he told me about the plan. “It’s another payer model, designed to make insurance companies even more rich,” I retorted.
Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against capitalism. However, in the case of health care, the system is set up so that insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, physicians, lawyers, etc., all benefit when a person is sick. I think we need to shift the focus so that people make money when Americans are healthy. Then we’ll no longer have pharmaceutical companies only looking for treatments for disease, we’ll have them looking for cures. Unfortunately, with the health care plan in play, if a pharmaceutical company cures a disease, a lucrative market is lost.
Senator Wyden explained the philosophy behind the Healthy Americans Act. If all Americans are covered by insurance, and companies are not allowed to cherry-pick only healthy people, the insurance company is now motivated to keep people healthier, or they lose money.
Are they? Or will our premiums just increase? That’s actually another point of the bill. President Obama has suggested that there be an upper limit on health care insurance costs for a family. His original suggestion in 2008 was $2500. While that may have increased a little, it’s still affordable for most Americans. Furthermore, in the Healthy Americans Act, people and families who cannot afford their premiums would be subsidized.
There’s another interesting component of the Healthy Americans Act. Senator Wyden said that staying healthy often requires an individual to change behavior and assume more personal responsibility for his or her health. That certainly fits the philosophy of natural medicine, where prevention and patient empowerment serve as the foundation for creating sustainable self-care.
Are there things I don’t like in the bill? Absolutely. Section 702 promised enhanced drug and medical device approval. The definition and implementation of the word “enhanced” is cause for concern. While we certainly need to look at the way a new product comes into the market (it currently takes too long and costs too much money), it troubles me that the pharmaceutical lobby may have slipped that into the Healthy American Act, which may ultimately hinder the few checks and balances we have in place for our health care.
Nevertheless, Senator Wyden is thinking about adequate, cost-effective health care for all Americans. It’s clear to me that he’s a smart and thoughtful man. He met with President Obama last week—a fact that may have been lost to the media among the Michael Jackson hype. I expect that we will see more of the Healthy Americans Act. You might want to check it out and see the direction your health care is heading.
.. … .. . . . .. . . . . .. . … . . . .
Note: Since this article was written President Obama rejected the Health Americans Act, citing the bill as “too radical.”