wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Jeffrey S. from East Elmhurst August 28, 2007 - 10:36AM

  This dialogue is so incredibly wrong. We are spending literally billions and billions of dollars in some bullshit war. Yet we have to engage in the most petty of wheeling and dealing to finding a way to insure this society's citizens. And yes, I have just Michael Moore's "Sicko". Our society is beyond contempt.

  
  
• [2] robert from park slope August 28, 2007 - 10:40AM

  While the goal of universal coverage for children is laudable, the S-Chip program as well as most other Democratic Party proposals, is ironically moving us further from what should be the ultimate goal of a single payor, national health care insurance system. Each one of these programs adds a new layer of bureacracy and complexity to a system already overburdened with both. I believe employers -- big and small -- are ready to sign onto some type of national health care that will remove their healthcare expense.

  
  
• [3] liz from astoria August 28, 2007 - 10:58AM

  I was a participant in NY Health Plus (specifically, Wellcare) for two years, before finally obtaining employment that provided me with health insurance. The idea of people taking advantage of the state health system is purely academic- the truth is that most people who can truly afford private insurance would probably prefer to have that, instead of a complicated public system that requires you to jump through a substantial number of hoops. For example, I had to get referrals from a primary care provider (PCP) for any specialist: although I was receiving weekly allergy shots at the time that were clinically indicated, I still had to go IN PERSON to the PCP's office, every 3 weeks, to get a new referral slip. No one with a steady, well-paying, full-time job would find this convenient or advantageous. I believe the percentage of public healthcare consumers who can afford private insurance (or insurance through their employers), but are "crowding out" or taking advantage must be extremely low.

  
  
• [4] liz from astoria August 28, 2007 - 10:59AM

  One other thing, a reminder of something I'm sure Brian Lehrer knows: the "poverty level" is based on a mathematical formula that was developed in the 1960s. It is outdated, and not necessarily an accurate reflection of whether a family or individual earns enough to maintain an adequate standard of living (for example, in the 1960s, people spent a much smaller percentage of their income on rent, compared to now). State and federal programs that require participants to be earning at a certain income level are using this "old-school" calculation; this is why many of them are based on people who earn anywhere from 150% to 400% of the poverty level. Remember, just because a family has a certain amount of income, doesn't mean that they can easily afford the skyrocketing costs of healthcare.

  
  
• [5] Jay Johnson from Brooklyn August 28, 2007 - 11:37AM

  The discussion of the SCHIP program accepted the monstuous red herring that we should be concerned about "crowd out". As Paul Krugman pointed out in yesterday's NY Times, we don't worry about crowding out private schools, unless we are free market lunatics.

  As Michael Moore points out, this is about who we are. Call it socialism, or compassion, or family values, but make medical care a human right. Let the insurance companies and their cronies rot.