Kline: Wrong on Health Care

Category: John Kline

by Dave Mindeman

Now that Cong. John Kline is the ranking member of the Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions sub-committee, his words on health care will carry a little more weight. And most of what he says sinks like a stone.

On his website, he makes a statement outlining his reasons for the "disastrous" idea of single payer health care. Let's take a look:

“Creating a new, one-size-fits-all health care system modeled on Medicare is a recipe for disaster,” said Congressman Kline, the ranking Republican on the HELP Subcommittee. “It would balloon the deficit and add to our mounting debt. It would drive up taxes while driving down medical innovation. It would ration care while empowering bureaucrats.”

If Cong. Kline would look at the real facts he would have to realize that what he says here is just plain wrong. Medicare has been one of the most cost-efficient parts of our healthcare system. It can be argued that some of the provider benefit payments are a little unfair and inconsistent, but overall cost has been a model. Unfortunately, the Medicare Part D prescriptions benefit version passed during the Bush administration catered to the drug companies and has been grossly inefficient in costs -- as well as limiting in real benefits as well.

Medicare-for-all simply would not balloon the deficit....and cost savings would probably limit additional taxation, while rationing care is simply a GOP fantasy. Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Then, in order, to back up his "wrong" assertions, he brings up his tired old Canadien health care arguments. Kline uses testimony from Dr. David Gratzer, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute:

“To understand the single-payer system, it is important to realize that in the Canadian model ‘single-payer’ is really a polite euphemism for a government-funded, government-managed system,” said Dr. Gratzer. “Critics of the American system note that it fails to provide universal coverage to its citizens. But Canada’s single-payer system also denies care; instead of denying insurance coverage, Canada’s public insurance plans simply limit the supply of costly medications and capital-intensive procedures.”

Let's first note that the US model will be far different from the Canadien style model.... but even at that, there are a number of "facts" about Canadien healthcare that Kline ignores:

1. There are many published studies directly comparing the quality of medical care in the two nations for cancer patients, renal dialysis patients etc. 38 of these studies were included in a systematic review which concluded that, on average, mortality rates are 5% lower in Canada.

2. There is a large body of literature showing that Canada’s health care system is far more efficient, with administrative overhead that is a small fraction of the U.S. level.

3. A recent analysis of deaths that could be prevented by good medical care ranked the U.S. worst among the 19 nations studied, well behind Canada which ranked 6th. Moreover, while Canada’s ranking improved between 1997 and 2003, the U.S. fell further behind.

As for rationing:

The U.S. already rations care. Rationing in U.S. health care is based on income: if you can afford care, you get it; if you can’t, you don’t. A recent study by the prestigious Institute of Medicine found that 18,000 Americans die every year because they don’t have health insurance. Many more skip treatments that their insurance company refuses to cover. That’s rationing. Other countries do not ration in this way.

Lastly, Kline goes into the "priorities" and "protections" that the still undefined Republican model would have:

1. Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions.

Kline has been in office since 2002. Have you seen any evidence that Kline has been actively seeking health care coverage for all? And pre-existing health condition issues have been discussed and lamented for some time. Insurance companies don't want it -- Kline didn't support it, until the public outcry has reached its current crescendo.

2. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run plan that would eliminate the health coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job.

Protect them? Forced into? Now, if Kline is talking about the current "public option" discussion, then he has his facts completely wrong. As Obama has stated -- that is only an option. But as for coverage through their jobs, Americans aren't really getting much choice in that regard. Employers contract on bids and change health policies virtually every year. Premiums change as well. Employees are happy to get it because trying to get coverage on their own is nearly impossible and unaffordable. A low cost, full coverage, and fully transferable single payer plan would be welcomed by everyone who got the facts instead of fear tactics.

3. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs.

You know, if Kline would actually read Obama's bill, this is already protected. And, again, for single payer I defer to the argument in number 2. Single payer would truly meet needs in every respect.

4. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats.

If Kline was honest about this, this statement would actually say this: Ensure that medical decisions are made by insurance bureaucrats. -- because that is what we have.

5. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases.

A number of insurance companies have tried disease management. Results? Costs skyrocketed. New treatments and developing cures are expensive and if you rely on insurance models, they would tend to be eliminated entirely because of the cost basis. Research and development is better left to Universities and Not for Profit Foundations. Drug companies have been the underwriters for research and we have paid dearly for that with incomplete and skewed data that has come back to damage long term health care outcomes. As well as astronomical initial "new drug" costs that are heaped on the United States consumer.

Kline gets his information from insurance company lobbyists. Maybe that's why his arguments are not "healthy" ones.