Wednesday, February 18, 2015

TWO PLANS, ONE SOLUTION

by Paul Gibbs

Over the past two weeks, two alternatives to Medicaid expansion have made it past the Utah Senate Health and Human Services Committee. I testified in behalf of the first, Senate Bill 164, Healthy Utah (as sponsored by Sen
. Brian Shiozawa). The second was Senate Bill 153, sponsored by Sen. Allen M. Christensen. While there are two plans, only Healthy Utah offers a workable and well-reasoned solution to the problem of Utah's coverage gap.

Christensen, one of the most vocal and staunch opponents of Healthy Utah, has presented a plan to cover only those who qualify as "medically frail". This fits his ideological belief that taxpayers shouldn't be providing healthcare to "able-bodied" people who don't work (despite the fact that multiple studies have conclusively proven that the majority of those in the coverage gap are working), and also fits his belief that the most vulnerable among us do deserve some help. While I greatly take issue with the first concept, the second is admirable, and demonstrates that, as insensitive as Christensen has sometimes appeared, he isn't heartless. I'll admit it took me some time to reach that conclusion, but speaking to some of his colleagues who have told me about good things he has done for patients and the medical community (while disagreeing with his current stance) has convinced me that we're not dealing with a melodrama villain here, just a basically decent man who also happens to be so ideologically stubborn that he refuses to see facts as facts if they disagree with his politics.

The first problem with the "medically frail" option was illuminated by Se. Edward Redd, a Republican who supports Healthy Utah: there simply is no such thing as a stable, easily identifiable group of "the medically frail". Health is not a steady state, it's something that changes over time. Those who are healthy now may be "medically frail" in a short time. Many may think they're healthy and, because they are uninsured, choose not to perform necessary routines such as check-ups. I fell into this category. It was only because my primary care doctor was called as an LDS Mission President and I was required to meet my new doctor to get some prescriptions renewed that I lucked into getting the diagnosis that my kidneys were failing and I needed a transplant. Under the status quo, I simply would have kept going until it was too late. I would not have qualified as "medically frail" under SB 153.

The second problem is that even those would qualify are now placed under an undue burden to prove that they do. My friend and fellow activist Stacy Stanford(who is in a wheelchair to a neurological condition) would not qualify as "medically frail" for the same reason that she doesn't currently qualify for traditional Medicaid: she can't afford to go to a doctor and get diagnosed. It's the height of irony that a plan presented by a staunch opponent of "socialized medicine"  (often claimed by its opponents to involve unnecessary bureaucratic complications) would, by its very nature, increase the bureaucratic hoops people are forced to jump through to get care. 46,000 people would be left with no option but to either pray they don't get sick, or, perversely, to pray they get sick enough to qualify for help/

Third, SB 153 simply makes no fiscal sense. It would allow $260 million of Utah taxpayer funds to keep going to other states, while 46 thousands Utahns go without any access to insurance. It would cost Utah an additional $30 million per year, while providing access to only about 10,000 Utahns. While Healthy Utah is the result of 2.5 years of study from the public and private sector, SB 153 was unveiled in a single meeting by a small group of legislators, with zero public input. It would be a tragic absurdity to accept a poorly reasoned plan which doesn't work financially or medically just to send a message that the majority of Utahns didn't support Barack Obama. I actually think Obama knows that already.

While two plans are on the table, only one solution is. Please contact your legislators immediately and tell them you support Healthy Utah, the real solution, and not the ill-advised SB 153.


No comments:

Post a Comment