Quantcast
 
 
 
HEALTH FOR LIFE

Cures for an Ailing System

With health care emerging as a major issue in the 2008 presidential race, NEWSWEEK asked seven Harvard experts to identify specific problems that ought to be addressed, and the steps that should be taken to solve them.

Suzy Allman / Getty Images
Under Strain: A family seeks help for chronic ailments at a facility for low-income people
 
Sponsored by
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

 

Ensure That Every American Has Health Insurance
Everyone in America should have health insurance that covers at least a basic level of care. This would give them access to medical services and ensure that health-care providers are paid. Improving access to care this way would actually slow the growth in health-care spending because people who become seriously ill—who have a heart attack, for example—wind up receiving costly medical care, subsidized by society, even if they are uninsured. Preventing that heart attack by removing barriers to health care not only improves health, it saves money.

A strong economy will not get us to universal care; the robust economic growth and tight labor markets of the late 1990s did not substantially reduce the number of uninsured. And we cannot expect significant numbers of the uninsured to pay for insurance on their own—just over half of the uninsured today have family incomes below $30,000, and premiums for self-purchased family policies are typically $10,000 or more. Many of the uninsured will need highly subsidized insurance. On the other hand, three out of 10 uninsured have incomes (above the median household income of $48,200 in 2006) that put them in the middle class. Most of these people might buy private coverage if they could find affordable policies.

The presidential candidates differ in the levels of detail about what they would do to reduce the number of uninsured, but they all assume that employer-sponsored health insurance will continue to cover a majority of Americans (currently 60 percent). The problem with this basic strategy is that globalization is forcing American companies to become more competitive in what they pay for labor. Employers increasingly resist paying more than a defined amount for health care; most cannot continue to pay health costs that have doubled in the last decade. In just the last seven years, the fraction of employers sponsoring health insurance has declined from 69 percent to 61 percent, and those that continue to provide it are asking employees to pay an increasing share of medical costs. We need to create a new financing structure that includes employers, before a majority pull out of paying for health insurance altogether.

A strategy worth examining is that of the Netherlands. Two years ago the Dutch created a new system that uses a combination of premiums and taxes to finance health insurance for everyone. People have a choice of 33 health plans, each of which shares a common set of health services. Each adult pays a modest annual premium (about $1,500) that depends on which health plans he or she chooses. Everyone also pays an income-related premium tax, so low-income people are subsidized and all children are covered. The income-related tax is reimbursed by workers' employers. Some of the tax revenues are used to adjust payments to health plans that enroll people likely to have higher medical expenses—thereby reimbursing plans for higher-cost indi-viduals and ensuring that they receive quality medical care.
Katherine Swartz, PH.D. Professor of Health Economics and Policy at Harvard School of Public Health

Eliminate Racial Disparities
As a practicing physician, I know firsthand that health care can work wonders for those who need it. Equal opportunities for good health are among the greatest benefits society can provide. Many research studies have found, however, that African-Americans, Latinos and American Indians often do not receive these benefits, for treatments ranging from primary care of diabetes to high-tech heart surgery.

For African-Americans, current disparities in health have deep roots in slavery and segregation. Even as overt discrimination in health care has been largely extinguished, the embers of inequality smolder and reignite. In Chicago, for example, death rates from breast cancer were nearly identical for white and African-American women in 1996. By 2003 these death rates fell 35 percent for white women but actually rose 12 percent for African-American women.

 
Discuss
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Porcupine @ 12/11/2007 10:12:14 PM

    Comment: Maybe someone should look at the big pharmaceutical rip-off (ex. all the peopole who take Lipitor don't need it!) and insist that people take more control of their own health instead of expecting the rest of us to take care of them after they have abused their bodies through poor diets, smoking, drinking, and on it goes.

  • Posted By: edward.johnson@abccodes.com @ 12/11/2007 3:08:52 PM

    Comment: With ???A Big Dose of Skepticism???, ???Rx for Health Care: Pain???, and ???Cures for an Ailing System??? in the issue of December 10, 2007, the editors of Newsweek certainly raised our consciousness on health care. Thank you.

    With the exception of the Samuelson judgment call (???Rx for Health Care: Pain???) you have only told me about ???status quo???. ???Status quo???, among other things, is non-competitive and physician-, pharmaceutical, and hospital-centric. We are in a health care crisis. Have I missed something or did ???status quo??? get us into crisis. Do you really expect ???status quo??? to get us out of the crisis? Give us responsibility with a free market and ???freedom of choice???. Give all qualified, trained, and capable health care providers ???freedom of practice???.

    To me, ???alternative??? does not mean ???quackery or snake oil??? unless you are brainwashed by ???status quo???. It means ???choice??? that is not ???status quo???. ???A Big Dose of Skepticism??? is a fair assessment of ???quackery and snake oil???, but it unfairly condemns the 2.5 million alternative health care providers who are NOT physicians (i.e., nurses, chiropractors, acupuncturists, physical and massage therapists, nutritionists, naturopaths, mid-wives, behavioral therapists, et al.).

    Health care is business and ???Cures for an Ailing System??? just covered ???status quo???. Why didn???t you interview Harvard business professors like Dr. Clayton Christianson (author of the ???Innovator??? series of books) or Dr Regina Herzlinger (author of ???Who Killed Health Care????). ???Status quo??? spends more money (universal coverage) on ???status quo???. When will we spend money smarter? Good luck with problems like diabetes, obesity, and mental health issues, ???status quo???; regretfully, you can???t handle them.

  • Posted By: johnrgraham @ 12/05/2007 2:43:22 PM

    Comment: America's crisis of over insurance is much greater that the crisis of uninsurance. In other countries, patients control more health care dollars than insurers or government bureaucrats. In the U.S., only 13 cents of every dollar is paid directly by patients. On the other hand, the notion that we spend less because our employers or the government control the other 87 cents is obviously absurd: we pay for it indirectly through lower wages and higher taxes. Take the money away from the employers and the government and give it back to the patients who need it. This will be done through tax reform: deductions and credits like Rudy Giuliani has proposed.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
The Peek
 
 
STRATEGIES

Harmonix, creator of Rock Band and Guitar Hero, is changing videogames.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
CAMPAIGN 2008
republican gop convention periscope mccain

John McCain's choice to manage the GOP convention this summer is lobbyist Doug Goodyear, whose firm once represented Burma's repressive regime.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu