Start with CHIP to Return to Sanity

Our nation should not waste time and energy on the past. Numerous protests to attempt to preserve ACA may or may not have impact. What is most important is shaping a better future - really shaping a better future. A better future begins with better children - children healthier and more developed mentally and physically and emotionally. Better health outcomes and better outcomes in education, economics, and other areas are about better children. Children are also the key to returning sanity and accountability to the new leadership.

Children's health insurance known as CHIP has enjoyed bipartisan political support for many years. The current movement away from this support is the mistake that should cost current leaders their leadership or force them to be accountable.

The politicians that support slashing CHIP have declared against children, have declared against key needs in Red Counties, have declared against people working their way out of poverty, and have declared against the working poor.
  • CHIP is a program specific to child health. Arguments used against wasted support for "less motivated" adults do not work. Cutting CHIP hurts children and those who care for children where care is most needed.
  • Well over 50% of poor children are in Red Counties. Red counties already have the fewest dollars spent locally per person. CHIP loss would decrease dollars for health care and result in declining support for local practices, local jobs, and local servi
  • CHIP is an important program for families moving up to escape welfare. Terminating CHIP widens the gap and provides a disincentive.
  • CHIP is an important program for working poor families.  
CHIP is not about political lines as indicated above and in multiple past votes in support of CHIP.
 
A setback on CHIP would demonstrate that Fire, Ready, Aim should be avoided although this appears to be the new plan for the nation and not just in health care.
Battles along political lines or battles over past programs will not work. People left behind who voted against the establishment are the ones who indicated their frustration with being left behind. Working with counties, populations, and leaders left behind across 2700 counties would indicate a change from the past and a move to support all Americans in the future. 

 Rather than fighting against Red Counties, red voters, or red politicians, change starts with understanding and awareness. Once awareness is built on both sides, progress can be made. For those who think that various health care designs have been equitable, a review of Designs Favoring Blue over Red can be useful.

After building awareness of CHIP with most poor children in Red Counties, the following can be pointed out about all of the counties left behind that are Red with a few dozen Blue and have higher concentrations of support dollars and people in need of support:
  • Higher concentrations of elderly, the most elderly, and the complex elderly
  • Higher concentration of Social Security dollars
  • Higher concentrations of SNAP dollars, especially those important to elderly and young children
  • Higher concentrations of Veterans
  • Higher concentrations of preventable deaths and numerous chronic diseases
  • Higher concentrations of age 65 and 66 Americans, with nearly 4 million about to lose Medicare and another 2 million in Red Counties. 
  • If all of the Red Party changes occur, the impact will be devastating on Red Counties. Prevention is better than addressing setbacks that can last for decades.
Since those about to be left behind are clearly concentrated in the lower concentration or Red Counties, and include people who voted to end the establishment policies, it might be helpful to work with the people who stand to lose the most from cuts in Medicaid, Medicare, decreases in Medicaid eligibility, increase to age 67 for Medicare eligibility, cuts in SNAP, cuts in Social Security, and especially cuts in CHIP.

In the rush to get what they want, sometimes people or politicians disregard areas that may be most important to them in the future. 

Making a different future now is most important.

The problems that resulted in the last election have not gone away. Blaming rural or Red County or other voters for the result only works to divide the nation further.
The serious problems that face the nation from proposed changes in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other areas are easy to predict. But these consequences are not easy to see for those who are likely to be impacted most.

Red counties are counties that most need the dollars, jobs, economic impact, and better outcomes in health and in education resulting from better state and national investments in people.  

Why not rally around CHIP in a pro active way?

Why not start with children and move to all people behind by design?

 

Recent Blogs 

Demographics Against the Democrats

Exploring Designs Favoring Blue Over Red

Scientists Fail at Science involving Physicians and Politics

Six Degrees of Discrimination By Health Care Payment Design

TeleOutreach or TeleProfiteering

The Tyranny of Health Care Research

Necessary Rather than Disruptive Transformations

Best of Basic Health Access Blogs

Does Academia Compromise Health Care for Most Americans?


Robert C. Bowman, M.D.        Robert.Bowman@DignityHealth.org

The blogs represent the opinion of the blogger alone.
Copyright 2017

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Fine CMS You Have Gotten Us Into

Perhaps we are indeed back to the time of Another Fine Mess (Laurel and Hardy). In a mad rush to implement innovation and to save all possible costs, CMS is creating complications for people that it is most responsible to protect. As PBS and Ken Burns celebrate the legacy of The Roosevelts, it is tragic to see what has become of over a century of effort involving Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and health care equity. The United States has one of the most complex health designs and clearly the various designers often know not what they are doing to others. More cartoons and comedians would find this a ripe area for material if not for the suffering involved. Health and Human Services has a huge role across Social Security and US health care. CMS or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has a dominant role to play in the design of health care in the United States.  CMS can be progressive or regressive. Interestingly CMS has chosen to appear to be progressive and in
Read more

The Essential True Reform Restores Primary Care and Much More

The list of distractions from True Reform are impressive. For decades True Reform has been specifically avoided as primary care worsens within practices and from outside. The demise is most specifically about the financial design. Unless there is a focus on True Reform, there is little hope for Basic Health Access. This may not make as much sense to those outside of family medicine. Family physicians not familiar with AAFP may also be clueless. If you think that you can fix primary care with more technology, more rearrangements, more types of health professional graduates, or more expansions of training - think again. None of these have any hope of working without financial design changes - major changes. The following are various concepts that dominate the discussions at AAFP and primary care meetings and media releases of associations and foundations and institutions. Members, staff, media releases, programs, and personnel have been reviewed.  There is little about Tru
Read more

Innovation Is the Problem Not the Solution for Worsening Health

Image
Innovation is good. Innovation worship is not good. Innovation application without scientific testing or clinical trials is unethical regarding clinical interventions and should be just as prohibited with regard to health policy. Clinical trials can harm hundreds or thousands. Innovative policies can harm millions. It takes a reasonable understanding of health care, health care outcomes, social determinants, and the investments that most improve social determinants to understand the consequences arising from the innovative nightmares past, present, and future. If you review the information sources with a critical eye, you too may find that the innovative policy designs have been disruptive to care, have hurt health care where health care is most needed, have reduced access to care, and have resulted in distortions in the literature. Indeed what is accepted and published in journals seriously lacks consideration of alternative hypothesis, lacks inclusion of many pages of limitatio
Read more