The Rising Cost of Healthcare: Chronic Disease
.
As the presidential campaign heats up, so does discussion of the issues. While I believe that at the time the votes are cast, most will be based on feelings and perception rather than purely on the important issues of the day, the primary still allow for a good amount of actual discussion on matters that otherwise might never get any real consideration. As we follow the various campaigns during their visits here in the still first in the nation primary state of NH, we have observed at most of these events supporters of the numerous causes vying for "collateral attention" that might be gained as the candidates interact with the regular folks of the Granite State.
.
The interest groups and causes are not strictly from one end of the political spectrum. Indeed, they come from every possible political stripe. The Ostrich Girl (YouTube here) promotes social security reform from what I would characterize as a decidedly conservative point of view, while others I've run into come from the farthest reaches of lefty-looneyville.
.
I'm pretty sure I don't agree completely with these folks, but I have to give them credit, they are present at every event. Like it or not, the subject of health care is important, and these folks are raising it...
.
.
It is my personal belief that the main issue first and foremost that must concern the next President is that of the war followed by homeland security and an element of border control that must be a part. Many Americans, I'm sure for the most part, agree. There is no doubt, however, that right on the heels of those is the matter of escalating health care costs. Liberal or conservative, the ever growing amounts of hard-earned dollars consumed by basic medical/health needs hurts. Whether it can be said an American President should somehow "control" one seventh of the US economy-- the health care industry-- is an argument I'll hold for another day.
.
As a conservative, from a global perspective, I see this debate as a struggle between traditional American free-markets versus a socialist model found in some European countries and Canada. This is one part of the debate that remains pretty much in the open and can be almost always heard discussed by the various candidates. Hillary, Obama, Richardson, Kucinich and the rest all promise one variation or other of "universal" health care while Rudy and other Republican wannabees want to increase free market involvement by independent consumers with maximun choices available. This is where I come down. I am sure that this aspect will be debated over and over again as the season rolls along.
.
Beyond the grand debate over what shape the health care industry and delivery system might take, there are other points to ponder and consider,
.
... number one being costs-- and what drives them upward. I have covered some factors driving expenses upward from the delivery end of the spectrum in past posts here, here, and here. What about other causes? What about the overall health of the sum total of all Americans? And how much of a say does the government have in this area? What can a president do? SHOULD a president do anything in a Nation of free markets?
.
According to a recent press release by the New Hampshire Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease, (NHPFCD) found at NHInsider, the
"#1 cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs in the U.S. [is] chronic disease."
The web site of their parent group, the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) tells us that
Chronic diseases are among the most prevalent and costly illnesses that affect Americans. They are also among the most preventable, according to the CDC.
With the discussion from politicians of all stripes about healthcare in America being a basic right for all people that, in many instances should be paid for by the government-- with everybody sharing a piece of the cost-- doesn't it then follow that, at some point, we all have an interest in controlling some of the costs? Does it make sense, knowing as noted above, that if the number one cause of rising costs is "chronic disease", and it is among "the most preventable", we should be attacking it and the root causes with much vigor? I say it does. The only question is how much of what can be done can should be government-dictated in a free society?
.
Here is a brief YouTube (just over a minute) of an example of what some Presidential wannabees are saying on the subject. This is Bill Richardson, during a discussion about health care, mentioning "preventable" health care matters, in this instance, nutritional meals in schools and the elimination of junk type foods. While I am certainly not a Richardson voter by any means, I would say he's onto something. After all, if the government is going to pay for something (school meals), then it very well deserves a say in some of the details. While I'm generally NOT in favor of government involvement, there is something to say about getting into the prevention side of the equation rather than simply paying for the "fix" after it's too late...
.
.
Hillary Clinton also mentioned the child nutrition topic as well, I believe. And I may have heard Republicans talking about promoting healthier lifestyles at one or two events also-- from the position of insurance breaks for healthy living. The bottom line is this: The cost of health care is rising astronomically. Also rising is the number of instances of chronic disease. Unlike other illnesses and conditions, these, as noted above, are in many instances preventable. The PFCD tells us further that
Many chronic diseases are caused or exacerbated by poor nutrition, lack of exercise, smoking, and other lifestyle choices.
At the end of it all, in today's system, WE ALL PAY FOR THOSE POOR LIFESTYLE CHOICES OTHERS MAKE. The question as we move forward is WHO we want in control of how we approach this problem-- the government, or ourselves? It seems to me that a Nation of free people ought to be responsible for their own health and well-being. The best way for this to happen is through information and education so that people will know what choices are best. Otherwise the government will do it. Given the potential impact to the overall economy as we move down the road, SOMEBODY'S going to have to do something!
Comments
Posted by: Randy | July 24, 2007 11:43 AM
Posted by: RobBoyce | July 24, 2007 12:14 PM
Posted by: doug | July 24, 2007 1:10 PM