Healthcare

If you're a conservative policy wonk -- and sadly, I fall into that category -- then Paul Ryan is more than a solid vice presidential selection. He's a rock star pick, the total package: the philosophical foundations, the mastery of details, and the ability to put it into plain English, all while conveying the humanity that the mainstream media believes conservatives lack. As a candidate, Ryan is the real deal.
 
It's Ryan's legislative proposals, however, that make some conservatives worry. And with good reason: the federal budget didn't get where it is simply because of elected officials who lack courage. Americans themselves are conflicted. They know that programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid can't continue without change and they're uncomfortable with the tax increases needed to finance these entitlements. But they also flinch at accepting a penny less in benefits than they've been promised. Ryan's various plans to fix entitlements, Medicare in particular, make him a risky pick given Democrats' amply-demonstrated willingness to drag the 2012 presidential campaign into the gutter.
 
Will Mitt Romney's choice of Paul Ryan doom their candidacy in Florida, Ohio and other senior-heavy states? It shouldn't, so long as Romney and Ryan define their positions rather than allowing themselves to be defined.
 
That’s why the Romney campaign needs to come out strong. They need to point out that it was President Obama, not Romney, who cut $700 billion from Medicare, not to save the program but to fund new entitlements. No Florida senior should enter the voting booth not knowing this fact. Listening to many Democratic talking heads, you’d think it was Romney who proposed the cuts.

The fight over health reform has plummeted from the stratospheric heights of constitutional jousting to nitty gritty decisions by states over whether they can afford reform. Critics warn states that reform will bankrupt them. The reality: states cannot afford to miss out on the cash and the almost free pass to provide coverage and care for millions of uninsured residents.

The recent Supreme Court decision to uphold the major provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), as Chief Justice John Roberts implied, does not make the law necessarily good policy or good politics. The evidence so far overwhelmingly refutes the law’s supporters on both fronts. The law continues to be a significant political liability, but more tragically, it has been an even bigger policy failure. Even the legal battles are just beginning.

In Zambia, like 14 other African countries, major progress has been made in the fight against malaria, thanks in large part to the efforts of the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI). The use of proven interventions like insecticide-treated bed nets, indoor residual spraying of insecticides (IRS), improved diagnostic tests, and highly effective antimalarial drugs has increased dramatically. The result: more than 28 million people were protected with IRS in 2011, and more than 31 million bed nets have been distributed since PMI began. Because of the program, more and more children are able to sleep under the protection of bed nets and benefit from IRS in their homes—contributing to more than one million lives being saved in the last decade alone.

We are one step closer to a healthier America — millions of Americans will be able to access affordable healthcare and coverage in the coming years. Here’s a radical suggestion: let’s make sure they don’t need to use it.

The New York Times reported last month that Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) is furious with the FDA's recent tactics. Grassley said, "They think they can be the Gestapo and do anything they want." Once again, federal agencies that should be leading the changes in healthcare are getting in the way and at a critical time.

Improvements and changes in the delivery of healthcare must come on the front lines – at the ‘micro’ level where individual patients and providers meet.  Changes at the ‘macro’ level in Washington are unlikely to occur.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the individual mandate but restricting the federal government’s ability to incentivize expansion of Medicaid, reform efforts on the federal level must focus on three major areas: 1) getting states to expand Medicaid, 2) launching the exchanges, and, most importantly, 3) expanding and accelerating efforts to control health care costs.

On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a decision that affects the health and well-being of every American, as well as the fiscal future of our nation.

If you want to see the future of American healthcare, unfortunately, all you have to do is look at what is happening today. 

For the almost 20 years I served in Congress, much of my focus was on healthcare issues and holding federal regulators accountable for ensuring the safety and well-being of Americans.