This Web Accessibility icon serves as a link to download eSSENTIAL Accessibility assistive technology software for individuals with physical disabilities.

FEATURES











Ask the White Guy: The Value of Healthcare Reform
By Luke Visconti - Oct 1, 2009
Photo





Also read: patients, disparities, health insurance, career advice

Question:

The fundamental issues of cost [of healthcare] are not being addressed. The fact is that more care will result in more tests and more diagnosis. That will add cost. This was the same flawed assumption of the HMO system. Please look at the Cash for Clunkers Program if you need a recent reminder of government inefficiency. ONE-TRILLION-DOLLAR DEBT = the country is broke. This program will turn us into one of the so many insolvent countries of the world and make us irrelevant as a world power.

Answer:

This has nothing to do with cost—but it has everything to do with values. Over history, taking care of people properly has proven to be an excellent return on investment. There’s nothing in the Constitution about public schools, but I can’t imagine a better return on investment—except where they’re allowed to fail. There’s a pattern to that failure: I find it very telling that it suddenly becomes not OK to follow up eight years of record-breaking spending when the people who would benefit from resolving the healthcare crisis are disproportionately Black and Latino.

A close look at American history shows us that our greatest problems are linked to conflict with our true values; our founders struggled to integrate slavery into a Constitution that presented rights as unalienable and belonging to people, and that lack of resonance resulted in a civil war that killed more than 3 million Americans (proportionate to today’s population). The Great Depression was caused by the xenophobic Smoot-Hawley trade act—despite the fact that our Declaration of Independence and Constitution do not talk about rights belonging to those with certain documents or living in certain boundaries.

In my opinion, it is reprehensible and immoral to have healthcare and to turn around and protest other Americans’ ability to get healthcare for themselves and their families. Further, echoing the opinions of jingoistic, but non-veteran, child-men such as Limbaugh and Beck—people whose credentials and accomplishments (outside of rabble rousing) wouldn’t fill a thimble—is an abuse of our First Amendment. The First Amendment enables you to have meaningful intellectual discipline. Read up on the subject, think for yourself and present some well-thought-out solutions.

The failure of our current system of healthcare is accelerating: Year after year of double-digit premium growth has resulted in a precipitous decline of Americans being provided healthcare by their employer—which will soon be less than 50 percent. Further, a story not being told is about the millions of Americans whose work status has been degraded—full-time supermarket workers with healthcare benefits being turned into part-time workers with no benefits, for example.

That means that your little island of comfort—where YOU have healthcare but can put your foot on the head of anyone trying to get some for themselves and their family—is shrinking. You’re not safe by denying others healthcare, something I would describe as a right in the modern world. You endanger yourself and our nation.

For in-depth information on the current state poverty, health coverage and income, visit DiversityIncBestPractices.com.

Your opinions and thoughts...
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
beautifully said.
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
Perhaps it has nothing to do with cost to you, but to me it most certainly does! The question is not whether people should be taken care of--nobody in this world wants to see their fellow humans die or suffer needlessly--but whether we should use a system with a proven track record for inefficiency and waste (government) to provide for something as important, expensive, and unwieldy as healthcare, particularly when other systems with better track records are available..
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
We are not a country of moral rights. You have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not "free" anything - healthcare, food, lodging, clothing etc. As a country we provide for our most poor, but your "moral" arguments have no basis other than to take from one who you feel had too much and give to another. Your use of statistics is disengenous at best. Next time I better ask someone other than the horribly named "white guy" who understand what rule of law is about. .
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
I completely reject your notion of what America is, what our society represents and what has made us great. Luke Visconti, CEO of DiversityInc.
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
I agree, if you fail to consider costs, you fail to develop a system that will actually function in the way we desire. Successful plans are not built solely on ethical concepts or ideals, but on practical, executable and affordable solutions that actually work. Cost matters to all of us, if we ignore cost then real and important programs will fail due to poor management. After the last 8 years of mismanagement, we cannot afford to continue ignoring cost and budget when making choices. I would hope that the CEO of this magazine would recognize that. .
Posted Tuesday Sep 29, 2009 by Guest;
The president's proposal does not ignore cost and budget. However, I guess it's far easier for you to place a higher priority on cost and budget over a child who is sick when it's not your child. Luke Visconti, CEO of DiversityInc.
Posted Wednesday Sep 30, 2009 by Guest;
Thank you for your eloquent explanation of why we must reform our health insurance system -- and for refusing to be diverted into side issues. It is morally right for a country as wealthy as ours to make sure everyone has basic health care. And beyond that it is an economic good for people to be healthy -- how will we be productive otherwise. And preventative and up front care is always cheaper in the long run. Yes, we might discover some diseases through systematic screening, and thus generate costs for treatment. But those diseases still would be there and usually delayed treatment at a later stage of disease costs a lot more. So the argument is specious from the beginning. With regard to some of the other comments: "We are not a country of moral rights." What?! Why did we have a revolution in the first place? Why did we have a civil war? You talk about "rule of law" as if it is not based on morals at all. Huh? "[O]ther systems with better track records [than government] are available." Um, what systems are those? What we have now?! Talk about "expensive and unwieldy." Talk about "inefficiency and waste." There's no point in even discussing things with people who are so deluded as to believe that our current "system" is efficient, or that health care is not a moral issue, or that Obama is like Hitler for wanting people to be taken care of. Craziness! .
Posted Wednesday Oct 28, 2009 by Guest;
We can spend billions sending men and women half way around the world to bomb and kill the people who live there...but veto SCHIP (health insurance for children) because it costs too much. That does not represent American, Christian, or any other value system I am familiar with..
Posted Thursday Dec 10, 2009 by Guest;
I have grave concerns with this whole process, and especially the approach. I, for one, do not envision that the majority of American "health care" providers actually provide health care. What I believe I see, instead, is often well-intentioned/educated individuals working long hours (or not) to provide instant relief versus care for the health and well-being of ailing persons. I won't try and elaborate about who/what is responsible for this unhealth system (whether it is government/insurance companies/drug companies/medical professionals/the US citizenry)--I'm not well versed. What I do know is that I still hope to see--most of important of all--a return to a medical system/process that does not drug you today so that you feel better/relief, but you're sick with the same problem you had before you spent too much of your resources to purchase the drugs. I hope for a system that has the flexibility to gain credibility for actually treating/remedying the ails of Americans. Unfortunately, a factor that is likely lurking in the background of this whole debate is who we consider to be Americans. It's all so sad..
Posted Thursday Dec 10, 2009 by Guest;
Mr.Visconti, Once more thanks for your deep faith on what have make this nation great, and how we can continue to grow as better people. Your article is eloquent, and true to our coomitment to purse human rights. And yes, health care is an inalianable human right. Chago - Boise ID.
Posted Wednesday Dec 30, 2009 by Guest;
Cost? Can we talk about the REAL costs of not providing adequate medical care and housing and a living wage? Look at our prisons! What a horrible waste of human resources. Do you think people only go there because they're bad? Do you think if they had their basic needs met by someone who taught them by example to care for others that they would be as they are? The wider the gap between the have & have-nots becomes the higher the crime rates and the hight the costs to house and process the prisoners we have created. Get a clue..

Comment on this article   
Name:
E-mail Address:
Comments:*


Career Search


Quick Search Advanced Search