If Roy Blunt Doesn't Care, Why Should I?
I’ll admit I was pretty intrigued to learn that the Health Care Solutions Working Group, composed of a number of House Republicans and chaired by Rep. Roy Blunt, had launched its own Web site. Since the group was formed about a month ago, speculation was rampant on what the group’s real aim would be – would they just be obstructionist, sight unseen, to the emerging health care legislation, or would they propose a principled alternative that also addresses our health care concerns? Based purely on their Web site and the complete lack of care with which it was thrown together, I’d say the actual answer is they just don’t give a crap.
I honestly wasn’t expecting anything as fancy as HealthReform.gov, the White House’s “health care central” Web site, filled with state-by-state reports on health care in America, content on the recently completed White House Summit and information on future summits. Given the smaller budget the group could devote to the project, I was barely expecting more than a description of the problem and a statement of principles for fixing health care.
Nope. They don’t even give me that. Let’s be Blunt, shall we? I could put a page like this together in 15 minutes, maybe a little less. For one thing, it’s not even it’s own Web site – it’s just a content page buried on Roy Blunt’s House Web site. Secondly, the content is laughably sparse – a 45 second YouTube that says nothing, a questionnaire that barely says anything, and a list of who else is in the group. Blunt’s radio address from two weeks ago said much more than this video:
One senses that Blunt wants to begin railing against government run insurance, but he keeps it general – that he only wants to see a plan that protects the rights of doctors and patients to make decisions, and is completely against any plan that infringes on that right. By logical extension, Blunt and the group should be dead set against the status quo, where underwriters, medical examiners and the administrative apparatus of the private insurance industry routinely interfere with that relationship and overrule the doctor-patient decision. Something tells me we’re not going to see this group come out against private insurance, though.
But the questionnaire they want you to submit shows the depths of ignorance on health care – the raison d’etre of the working group. What’s the first question? Basically, do you care more about access, affordability or quality? Well, gosh, Congressman, is it too much to ask for all three, equivalent to what other countries – our strategic allies and economic competitors – have? And can we not, at a bare minimum, agree that you cannot tackle these issues in isolation?
The second question is both more insulting and more transparent. Who do you want controlling your health care, it asks: a doctor and patient or a government agency? Aside from the fact that this has nothing to do with costs or coverage, and maybe barely about quality, it’s yet another false dichotomy. Health care reform is the way to give that choice back to doctors and patients and not have it overruled by private insurance.
Why, when health care costs are crushing individuals, large businesses, the federal government, state governments, doctors and hospitals, does this group not devote even one word to the problem, let alone a solution? With article after article, like this one in Business Week, devoted to the economic disadvantage of the status quo for business and the free market, is the site’s “Latest Health Care News” section all commentary on the ills of government involvement in health care? Put another way, there’s no actual news in the news section! Yet I can barely open a browser anymore without reading about the intense pressure caused by our broken system – not commentary, but actual news.
There’s no escaping the notion that Blunt and his compatriots care less about fixing health care than using tired talking points from the ‘90s. And if Roy Blunt clearly doesn’t care about what he’s saying about health care, why should I?







COMMENTS (3)