Z
Zaroc Stone
Guest
Fought for America? Bush Still Won't Give You Health Care
By Eric Haas, Rockridge Nation. Posted November 8, 2007.
Subjecting veterans to the profit-maximizing health insurance industry
leaves our moral debt unpaid.
Last April, President Bush told members of American Legion Post 177
that "we owe the families and the soldiers the best health care
possible."
That debt is still unpaid. According to a new report by Harvard
Medical School researchers, published last week in the peer-reviewed
American Journal of Public Health, millions of veterans and their
family members have not been getting the medical care they need.
People assume that veterans automatically get health care from
Veterans Affairs (VA). They don't. Despite their military service, the
Bush Administration requires most veterans to pay additional money for
insurance in order to get care. But many veterans don't earn enough
money to be able to buy health insurance. At the same time, they
aren't poor enough under Bush Administration guidelines to get VA care
or to qualify for Medicaid. Abandoned, these veterans struggle alone
to find health care. In the insurance marketplace, our veterans remain
in harms way -- their service, and our debt, forgotten.
Why haven't we made good on our obligation? Our moral debt to our
veterans, based on mutual need and shared responsibility, goes unpaid
in the current health insurance system because it is based upon
corporate self-interest. An insurance company's responsibility is to
maximize profit, even when that means denying care to veterans.
Clearly, our national moral responsibility is not the same as an
insurance company's corporate fiduciary duty to maximize profits.
(This concept is discussed further in our Rockridge Institute paper,
The Logic of the Health Care Debate).
In fact, as the veterans' predicament demonstrates, these obligations
can be quite contradictory. A vet is a national hero. Soldiers risk
their lives. Many will be injured. Some will die. In return, we
promise to support our troops in whatever way possible -- both on the
battlefield and when (or if) they return as veterans. Certainly, our
support includes medical care.
There is no price that can be put on the risks a soldier takes. Nor is
there a way to estimate the care a veteran will need during their
lifetime. Our mutual obligations are easily understood, but impossible
to quantify.
But a health insurance company's duty is to its shareholders. Its
legal and contractual obligation is to maximize profits. Health
insurance companies do that by quantifying likely health costs, and
selling the policies for more than they will pay out in benefits. If
you cannot afford their policies, then they will not sell you one.
Simply put, a veteran is just another potential customer.
The national failure to meet our shared obligations to veterans -- who
risked life and limb on our behalf -- is a disgrace. It betrays the
moral vacuum at the center of our current health care system.
Let's simplify to make this ugly circumstance as clear as we can.
Imagine a town. Inside the town live health insurance executives and
the politicians who serve their interests. Soldiers risk life and limb
to protect the town. Later, a soldier gets sick. "Sorry, you don't
earn enough to afford our insurance policies. Try the next town," say
the insurance executives. Except, in America, there is no "next town."
One way that we could meet our national obligation to support our
troops is for the government to provide or guarantee medical care for
all veterans. A version of this idea occurred through the Veterans'
Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-262). The
Act opened VA care to all veterans, with copays for those veterans
considered to be "non-poor" (generally those making $30,000 and
higher). In January 2003, however, the Bush Administration ordered a
halt to the enrollment of "non-poor" veterans. The VA facilities were
"full." To date, it's no better. As a result, according to the Harvard
Medical School study, millions of vets and their family members cannot
afford health insurance and go everyday without needed medical care.
That is tragic. Something must change.
The authors elegantly summarize the central role that veterans and
health care play in our national community:
The disturbing scene of returning soldiers left without care is a
stark reminder that America is a nation bound by mutual obligations
and shared responsibility. We owe veterans care not because they can
pay for it nor because they are heroes but -- as their sacrifices
remind us -- because members of a society are obligated to serve and
protect each other.
In America, we don't have a health care system; we have an insurance
marketplace. Until we understand the difference, no reform will work.
To our low-income veterans, that is a daily hardship. We should make
their hardship our problem too. One we solve together. Now. We owe
that to our veterans.
Eric Haas is a senior fellow at the Rockridge Institute.
By Eric Haas, Rockridge Nation. Posted November 8, 2007.
Subjecting veterans to the profit-maximizing health insurance industry
leaves our moral debt unpaid.
Last April, President Bush told members of American Legion Post 177
that "we owe the families and the soldiers the best health care
possible."
That debt is still unpaid. According to a new report by Harvard
Medical School researchers, published last week in the peer-reviewed
American Journal of Public Health, millions of veterans and their
family members have not been getting the medical care they need.
People assume that veterans automatically get health care from
Veterans Affairs (VA). They don't. Despite their military service, the
Bush Administration requires most veterans to pay additional money for
insurance in order to get care. But many veterans don't earn enough
money to be able to buy health insurance. At the same time, they
aren't poor enough under Bush Administration guidelines to get VA care
or to qualify for Medicaid. Abandoned, these veterans struggle alone
to find health care. In the insurance marketplace, our veterans remain
in harms way -- their service, and our debt, forgotten.
Why haven't we made good on our obligation? Our moral debt to our
veterans, based on mutual need and shared responsibility, goes unpaid
in the current health insurance system because it is based upon
corporate self-interest. An insurance company's responsibility is to
maximize profit, even when that means denying care to veterans.
Clearly, our national moral responsibility is not the same as an
insurance company's corporate fiduciary duty to maximize profits.
(This concept is discussed further in our Rockridge Institute paper,
The Logic of the Health Care Debate).
In fact, as the veterans' predicament demonstrates, these obligations
can be quite contradictory. A vet is a national hero. Soldiers risk
their lives. Many will be injured. Some will die. In return, we
promise to support our troops in whatever way possible -- both on the
battlefield and when (or if) they return as veterans. Certainly, our
support includes medical care.
There is no price that can be put on the risks a soldier takes. Nor is
there a way to estimate the care a veteran will need during their
lifetime. Our mutual obligations are easily understood, but impossible
to quantify.
But a health insurance company's duty is to its shareholders. Its
legal and contractual obligation is to maximize profits. Health
insurance companies do that by quantifying likely health costs, and
selling the policies for more than they will pay out in benefits. If
you cannot afford their policies, then they will not sell you one.
Simply put, a veteran is just another potential customer.
The national failure to meet our shared obligations to veterans -- who
risked life and limb on our behalf -- is a disgrace. It betrays the
moral vacuum at the center of our current health care system.
Let's simplify to make this ugly circumstance as clear as we can.
Imagine a town. Inside the town live health insurance executives and
the politicians who serve their interests. Soldiers risk life and limb
to protect the town. Later, a soldier gets sick. "Sorry, you don't
earn enough to afford our insurance policies. Try the next town," say
the insurance executives. Except, in America, there is no "next town."
One way that we could meet our national obligation to support our
troops is for the government to provide or guarantee medical care for
all veterans. A version of this idea occurred through the Veterans'
Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-262). The
Act opened VA care to all veterans, with copays for those veterans
considered to be "non-poor" (generally those making $30,000 and
higher). In January 2003, however, the Bush Administration ordered a
halt to the enrollment of "non-poor" veterans. The VA facilities were
"full." To date, it's no better. As a result, according to the Harvard
Medical School study, millions of vets and their family members cannot
afford health insurance and go everyday without needed medical care.
That is tragic. Something must change.
The authors elegantly summarize the central role that veterans and
health care play in our national community:
The disturbing scene of returning soldiers left without care is a
stark reminder that America is a nation bound by mutual obligations
and shared responsibility. We owe veterans care not because they can
pay for it nor because they are heroes but -- as their sacrifices
remind us -- because members of a society are obligated to serve and
protect each other.
In America, we don't have a health care system; we have an insurance
marketplace. Until we understand the difference, no reform will work.
To our low-income veterans, that is a daily hardship. We should make
their hardship our problem too. One we solve together. Now. We owe
that to our veterans.
Eric Haas is a senior fellow at the Rockridge Institute.
