Affordable Healthcare - Proposed Reforms and Public Options Fall Short
Campbell-Graves' latest report, Privileged Healthcare - the Uniquely American Solution,
explains how healthcare reform proposals ignore economic factors and burden the middle-class.
Santa Fe, NM (PRWEB) November 29, 2009 -- With the Senate moving to debate healthcare reform,
middle-income families need to ask whether the proposals, including those for a public option, are capable of
delivering on the promise of affordable healthcare. Analysis of key reform provisions reveals the proposals do not
deliver on the promise.
The latest report from public-service group Campbell-Graves.org, entitled Privileged Healthcare - the Uniquely
American Solution, examines five key areas of House and Senate reform provisions. Four-of-the-five areas lead to
privileged healthcare, the opposite of affordable.
The healthcare debate centers on whether health is an essential public need, like public education and safety. If
health were an essential public need, healthcare would be treated as a right, available to all citizens regardless of
income or wealth. The current system follows the opposite premise, providing care based on a family's ability to
pay, a privileged system. Many in Congress appear unclear about differences between the two.
Some in Congress, such as Representative Zack Wamp (R-TN), have declared healthcare to be a privilege.
Others, including Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), say every American should have a right to medical treatment
without bankrupting-levels of debt. Details of reform proposals show how both statements reflect a common
belief. House and Senate bills might reduce the size of a medical bankruptcy filing, but both proposals fall short
on addressing burdensome cost problems that drain middle-class families of scarce resources.
Author Phil Campbell-Graves concludes, "Healthcare reform proposals are uninspired and wasteful." Both
proposals implement plans that undermine their stated goal. Campbell-Graves believes affordab