Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY
/
Commonsense healthcare policies can solve our crisis of legitimacy
Commonsense healthcare policies can solve our crisis of legitimacy
Oct 8, 2024 3:24 PM

Every day that the partisan rancor over the 2020 presidential election drags on, it poses a challenge to our nation’s well-being. As the candidates and pundits escalate their rhetoric, more Americans lose faith in our political process. Many get angry. Others check out entirely. Even though 2021 is not an election year, it threatens to e the year more voters than ever e disappointed in their elected representatives and disenchanted with the political process.

Unfortunately, our elected leaders’ legislative agenda thus far has not focused on the issues that voters named as their top concerns this election: essentials like healthcare and the economy. If lawmakers fail to help our citizens improve their families’ lot in life, they risk erasing the remaining shreds of trust voters place in them.

What are a few simple, nonpartisan healthcare policies that Congress could plish to get people better and cheaper access to healthcare?

One lesson learned from the COVID-19 pandemic is that doctors need to be able to provide some care remotely, taking advantage of munications to help patients who cannot or should not show up in crowded hospitals and doctors’ offices. Some of these patients will continue to benefit from telehealth after the pandemic subsides. It will save rural families long trips to their healthcare provider and help struggling, working families save valuable time on visits to a healthcare facility.

Last spring, 18 states and the District of Columbia implemented some sort of emergency policy to expand access to telemedicine, and 23 states along with D.C. made it easier for doctors to provide remote care from outside the state. An announcement by then-Vice President Mike Pence that the Department of Health and Human Services would allow all doctors to practice telehealth across state lines caused confusion and raised questions about federal authority, but the underlying idea was a step in the right direction. Rather than waiting on the vice president and the federal bureaucracy to act, Congress could – and should – take the initiative on this issue. Legislators should look at best practices and additional needs that remote healthcare providers have identified. Then, they should do everything in their power to remove regulatory burdens from telemedicine and make it as accessible as possible. By doing this, lawmakers would improve many people’s lives and demonstrate that they’re putting their constituents first, even in divisive and uncertain times.

Another area where Congress outsourced its job to the executive branch is drug price reform – and in this case, the result may cause actual damage, not just confusion. In September, President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing the “most favored nations” drug price control scheme, stating that Medicare will not pay any more for medications than they cost in other developed countries. While a court later enjoined it, President Joe Biden also supports price controls. This sounds good in theory, given that the United States spends twice the average among OECD nations on prescription medications. It might also please voters who are angry at unscrupulous panies. However, there is good reason to expect that this policy will do more harm than good.

Supporters of price controls often point out other countries where drug prices are lower. In reality, America’s free-market system enables other countries to get away with price controls in the first place. Those countries effectively transfer the costs of research, development, and testing new drugs to the United States – something that is not good for us or them in the long run. The health research society ISPOR reports that price controls slow down the development of new drugs by removing the profit incentive for drug developers. Additionally, the American Consumer Institute reports that patients in price-controlling countries can only access about half of the medications that Americans can. Losing our advantages in innovation and access would be doing a disservice to patients in our country.

Instead of waiting to see if price controls will work, Congress should tackle the real cause of high drug prices: excessive Food and Drug Administration regulations. A recent report by the President’s Council of Economic Advisors outlined several potential solutions. Legislators should take care to promising the safety of the testing process – but the FDA’s requirements add an average of 16 months to the years of clinical trials that new medications already undergo. Congress needs to identify ways to streamline this process.

That’s not to say that the FDA has done nothing to address the problem. The agency approved an unprecedented number of generic drugs and made more drugs available over the counter under the Trump administration. This is a great sign. The FDA has reported that having just two generic pete against one another reduces prices by more than half, and having petitors leads to a massive 95% drop in prices. Congress should see what it can do on its end to expand access to medications even further.

Ultimately, the biggest healthcare fight in Congress will concern the Affordable Care Act and the private insurance industry. But instead of expanding costly government programs, lawmakers could help empower a care option that allows people to bypass private insurers entirely. Direct primary care is not insurance; it’s a system where a patient pays a doctor a fixed monthly fee for a defined set of services.

DPC has enormous potential: A study by the Society of Actuaries found that DPC patients schedule appointments quicker, spend less time in the waiting room, and have more face-to-face time with their doctors than non-DPC patients. Best of all, these improvements did not increase the burden on our healthcare system. The study showed that DPC patients went to the emergency room 40% less often and used 12% less care overall. Regrettably, an Internal Revenue Service rule intended to help DPC users deduct their fees as medical care ended up treating DPC as insurance – which could lead to the same red-tape issues that plague the health insurance industry. Lawmakers should rectify this and do all they can to protect DPC as an affordable, innovative alternative to traditional insurance.

In the next four years, there will be plenty of bitter fights and partisan stand-offs in Congress, especially over healthcare. But before they take on Obamacare, the insurance industry, and other intractable issues, our legislators can do a few simple things that demonstrably improve their constituents’ lives – and convince the American people that Congress is still responsive to their needs.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY
Adam Smith and the Poor
Adam Smith did not seem to think that riches were requisite to happiness: “the beggar, who suns himself by the side of the highway, possesses that security which kings are fighting for” (The Theory of Moral Sentiments). But he did not mend beggary. The beggar here is not any beggar, but Diogenes the Cynic, who asked of Alexander the Great only to step back so as not to cast a shadow upon Diogenes as he reclined alongside the highway....
Spurgeon and the Poverty-Fighting Church
Religion & Liberty: Volume 33, Number 4 Spurgeon and the Poverty-Fighting Church by Christopher Parr • October 30, 2023 Portrait of Charles Spurgeon by Alexander Melville (1885) Charles Spurgeon was a young, zealous 15-year-old boy when he came to faith in Christ. A letter to his mother at the time captures the enthusiasm of his newfound Christian faith: “Oh, how I wish that I could do something for Christ.” God granted that wish, as Spurgeon would e “the prince of...
How Dispensationalism Got Left Behind
Whether we like it or not, Americans, in one way or another, have all been indelibly shaped by dispensationalism. Such is the subtext of Daniel Hummel’s provocative telling of the rise and fall of dispensationalism in America. In a little less than 350 pages, Hummel traces how a relatively insignificant Irishman from the Plymouth Brethren, John Nelson Darby, prompted the proliferation of dispensational theology, especially its eschatology, or theology of the end times, among our ecclesiastical, cultural, and political...
Mistaken About Poverty
Perhaps it is because America is the land of liberty and opportunity that debates about poverty are especially intense in the United States. Americans and would-be Americans have long been told that if they work hard enough and persevere they can achieve their dreams. For many people, the mere existence of poverty—absolute or relative—raises doubts about that promise and the American experiment more generally. Is it true that America suffers more poverty than any other advanced democracy in the...
C.S. Lewis and the Apocalypse of Gender
From very nearly the beginning, Christianity has wrestled with the question of the body. Heretics from gnostics to docetists devalued physical reality and the body, while orthodox Christianity insisted that the physical world offers us true signs pointing to God. This quarrel persists today, and one form it takes is the general confusion among Christians and non-Christians alike about gender. Is gender an abstracted idea? Is it reducible to biological characteristics? Is it a set of behaviors determined by...
Conversation Starters with … Anne Bradley
Anne Bradley is an Acton affiliate scholar, the vice president of academic affairs at The Fund for American Studies, and professor of economics at The Institute of World Politics. There’s much talk about mon good capitalism” these days, especially from the New Right. Is this long overdue, that a hyper-individualism be beaten back, or is it merely cover for increasing state control of the economy? Let me begin by saying that I hate “capitalism with adjectives” in general. This...
Lord Jonathan Sacks: The West’s Rabbi
In October 1798, the president of the United States wrote to officers of the Massachusetts militia, acknowledging a limitation of federal rule. “We have no government,” John Adams wrote, “armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, and revenge or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.” The nation that Adams had helped to found would require the parts of the body...
Up from the Liberal Founding
During the 20th century, scholars of the American founding generally believed that it was liberal. Specifically, they saw the founding as rooted in the political thought of 17th-century English philosopher John Locke. In addition, they saw Locke as a primarily secular thinker, one who sought to isolate the role of religion from political considerations except when necessary to prop up the various assumptions he made for natural rights. These included a divine creator responsible for a rational world for...
Creating an Economy of Inclusion
The poor have been the main subject of concern in the whole tradition of Catholic Social Teaching. The Catholic Church talks often about a “preferential option for the poor.” In recent years, many of the Church’s social teaching documents have been particularly focused on the needs of the poorest people in the world’s poorest countries. The first major analysis of this topic could be said to have been in the papal encyclical Populorum Progressio, published in 1967 by Pope...
Jesus and Class Warfare
Plenty of Marxists have turned to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity. Memorable examples include the works of F.D. Maurice and Zhu Weizhi’s Jesus the Proletarian. After criticizing how so many translations of the New Testament soften Jesus’ teachings regarding material possessions, greed, and wealth, Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart has gone so far to ask, “Are Christians supposed to be Communists?” In the Huffington Post, Dan Arel has even claimed that “Jesus was clearly a Marxist,...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2024 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved