“Senator Kathleen Vinehout is known for pushing socialized medicine, but no bill was passed because it was ridiculously expensive” claims a letter to the editor in this weekend’s Eau Claire Leader Telegram.

To not change our health insurance system is ridiculously expensive.

We have the highest priced system in the world. Per person costs are twice that of any other country. The share health care takes out of our economy is far greater than any other country. You’d think we would be the healthiest people on the planet.

But we are not.

We rank 19th of industrialized countries in preventable deaths. We rank 48th in life expectancy and 29th in infant mortality.

To do nothing is to continue a system that provides very poor results at a very high cost.

Everyone knows a story of a $350 aspirin, a medical test repeated simply because it was done at a different clinic or a treatment that proved ineffective. Hospital administrators bemoan the rules their billing office must follow when insurers all use different forms, different rules, routinely deny claims and even charge hospitals and doctors for the processing of covered claims.

In a recent Washington Post article, a Seattle health system CEO reported that as much as half of the $2.3 trillion we spend on health care does nothing to improve health. We are not getting value out of the dollars we spend.

But when we propose reform of our system, many people argue it is too expensive. Healthy Wisconsin would have covered 500,000 people who are now uninsured; would have provided better coverage for millions more who are now paying too much for too little and would have still saved all of us over a $1 billion in paperwork alone.

There may be other tradeoffs to debate: the way we pay for health care, the role of insurance companies, the types of choices we have available – but if those tradeoffs bring us closer to the present way of doing things the more expensive it becomes.

Change will be less expensive. And that is confirmed in each jurisdiction where everyone is covered - the costs are far less and the health results are far better.

Healthy Wisconsin, as it was introduced, was funded with a payroll tax because federal law limited the state’s options. People didn’t like how we paid for the plan. But the state may have more alternatives soon. A recent court decision and a new administration in Washington may give Wisconsin lawmakers more flexibility. New ideas are good for debate and flexibility in funding may improve the likelihood of success.

Changing the way we pay for health care is only part of the answer. Across the country there is remarkable agreement on what else must be part of reform.

Government ought not be the provider of health care but rather the organizer of a system based on value. We must begin to pay for results, learn to manage chronic disease, keep care coordinated and eliminate duplication, errors and inefficiency. We must encourage doctors and hospitals to use electronic records and prescriptions. We need to know what treatments work best and reward success and best practices. We must build primary care, prevention and wellness as the foundation of our health care system.


None of this is ‘socialized medicine’. The sooner we can get away from debating false choices – the sooner we can get to a real discussion about what we want our health care system to look like ten years from now.


Anything less will be ridiculously expensive.


State Senator Kathleen Vinehout serves the 31st Senate District. She can be contacted by mail at Senator Kathleen Vinehout, P.O. Box 7882 Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7882 by phone at 877-763-6636 (toll free) or email at Sen [dot] Vinehoutatlegis [dot] wisconsin [dot] gov


Share/Save
Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Steve Hanson's picture
I can't help but note


That you at least CLAIM to be assoiated with Anthem Blue Cross --- So in fact - you're interested in spewing out the same old fear stories that the medical insurance industry keeps trotting out - Do you really think that as someone promoting health insurance, you have an opinion on health care is more interested in the public good than in your own financial interests?

We know that in Britian


We know that in Britian thousands of people wait for hours in abulances (and sometimes die there), because they passed a law limiting the number of hours people had to wait in waiting rooms. What I mean is, how long before a cancer patient is referred to a specialist for treatment. Or, how long does someone wait for a hip replacement? Or, how much faster can a dog get an MRI than a human? You may live in Michael Moore's world of make believe Kathleen, but before you bring these horrors to us, for a mere 15% tax on our payroll, I want you to come clean and give us the truth about these wonderful health care systems that you wish for us to import to Wisconsin.

health care reform


A reform in the health care system could really be costly; but that's what the country needs. Health care insurance is too expensive and a million Americans does not have this. I agree with you Kathleen, that care, prevention and wellness are the foundation of a health care system; and these must be effectively pushed through. Also, we all want an affordable health care system.

Kathleen is correct


Jimmy John has it wrong. A single payer system does not (necessarily) cut costs, it eliminates the 31% of insurance bureaucracy waste and spends it instead on actual health care. That's an *increase* not a decrease. Medicare has no exorbitant wait times now, and a Medicare-for-all system wouldn't either. It's the best thing that could happen to the US economy. Please see Medicare-for-all is best corporate bailout… Jack Lohman

Not exactly Kathleen


Your statistics come from the unaudited data provided by the World Health Organization and have no basis in reality. I can put it nicely and suggest that you have been misinformed. Or, you can tell us all the amount of time patients wait in all of these other glorious countries for care. No. We know that in Britian thousands of people wait for hours in abulances (and sometimes die there), because they passed a law limiting the number of hours people had to wait in waiting rooms. What I mean is, how long before a cancer patient is referred to a specialist for treatment. Or, how long does someone wait for a hip replacement? Or, how much faster can a dog get an MRI than a human? You may live in Michael Moore's world of make believe Kathleen, but before you bring these horrors to us, for a mere 15% tax on our payroll, I want you to come clean and give us the truth about these wonderful health care systems that you wish for us to import to Wisconsin.
Post new comment
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.
Kachingle!

Regular Reader? - Support Uppity Wisconsin and other sites with Kachingle! Spend $5/month across your favorite web sites, including Uppity Wisconsin. Mouse over above to find out more.

Uppity Fund
Tom Barrett (WI-Gov) $
Russ Feingold (WI-Sen) $
Paulette Garin (WI-01) $
Tammy Baldwin (WI-02) $
Gwen Moore (WI-04) $
David Obey (WI-07) $
Steve Kagen (WI-08) $
Pat Kreitlow (WI-SD-23) $
Kathleen Vinehout (WI-SD-31) $
Kristen Dexter (WI-HD-68) $
Jeff Smith (WI-HD-93) $
Recent comments