Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditLast Spring, following the death of twelve-year old Deamonte Driver of Maryland whose untreated tooth infection spread to his brain, I wrote about the national epidemic of dental disease and the lack of access to dental care faced by the poor and working class. Last month, an article in the New York Times painted a horrifying picture of the state of dental care, where bootleggers sell dentures that would otherwise be unaffordable to many people missing teeth; where low Medicaid reimbursement rates perpetuate a dearth of participating dentists; where untreated cavities are a leading cause of kids missing school, people use Krazy Glue to reattach broken teeth, or swish rubbing alcohol to treat an infection, "burning the gums and creating ulcers."
Currently, Medicaid only covers pulling teeth to treat infections – not root canals or dentures – which can certainly dim the job prospects for someone trying to earn a living in our economy.
"Try finding work when you're in your 30s or 40s and you're missing front teeth," Jane Stephenson, founder of the New Opportunity School in Berea, Kentucky told the Times.
According to Maryland Senator Ben Cardin's staff, dental decay is now the most common chronic childhood disease in the US, affecting twenty percent of children aged 2 to 4, fifty percent of those aged 6 to 8, and nearly sixty percent of fifteen year olds. It is five times more common than asthma among school age children, and nearly 40 percent of African-American children have untreated tooth decay in their adult teeth. Improper hygiene can increase a child's adult risk of having low birth-weight babies, developing heart disease, or suffering a stroke. Eighty percent of all dental problems are found in just 25 percent of children, primarily those from lower-income families.
In March, in response to Driver's death, Cardin cosponsored the Children's Dental Health Improvement Act of 2007 along with Senator Jeff Bingaman, who had pushed similar legislation for seven years. The bill called for $40 million annually for five years to help community health centers hire dentists to serve poor children. It also would have awarded $50 million in grants to help states improve dental services to children enrolled in Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). At the time, Cardin said on the Senate floor: "It is outrageous today that in America, a young boy can die because his family can't find a dentist to remove an infected tooth. It is not enough simply to mourn Deamonte's death. We must learn from this failure of our health-care system and take action to make sure it never happens again."
The dental bill was folded into the CHIP bill. The final version of CHIP – passed by Congress and vetoed by President Bush – didn't contain the grants sought by Cardin and Bingaman but it did guarantee dental coverage to kids and also established minimum standards of care. Senator Cardin explained the dilemma he and his colleagues faced: "When things get tight in state budgets, one of the first things they cut is something that's not mandated, so when we had to choose between grants to cover dental benefits or a guarantee of dental care, the latter was a greater, immediate priority. We know now that dental care is vital to a child's overall health -- experts tell us that it impacts many other aspects of their health as well. Not to mention it's an indicator of one's ability to get ahead and thrive," he said.
Cardin, Bingaman, and their allies were successful in passing $5 million in grants in the Labor Health and Human Services bill to help states reach poor kids but clearly – as indicated by the initial grant request – the need is far greater than that. Even Cardin said of the CHIP bill, "There is more work to do…. We still have to improve reimbursement for dental providers [so more dentists will participate in Medicaid], and get grants to the states to allow them to offer dental wraparound coverage for those who may have health coverage, but no dental insurance."
A Cardin spokeswoman also said that this is the best that Democrats were able to achieve at this time. "Clearly healthcare in the US needs help. We need to fix the system as a whole and Democrats in the Senate are trying to make changes that reflect those priorities."
Indeed, improving reimbursement rates and the availability of dentists is necessary in order for poor kids to avoid long waiting lists and get the timely services needed. (One dentist, for example, told the Washington Post that an abscess "is like a time bomb, ticking.") When Driver passed away nearly a year ago the state Senate initially responded with legislation to provide $2 million annually over the next three years to expand dental clinics for the poor. But it was determined at the time that the funds were not available, causing State Senator Jamie Raskin to tell me, "We always have enough money for things we don't need – like funding the war in Iraq, or boondoggle projects that will make developers a lot of money. But when it comes to things we do need – like dental care for kids – suddenly there's no money."
According to the Washington Post, less than one-third of nearly 500,000 Maryland children on Medicaid saw a dentist last year, "a statistic that is typical of the problem nationwide." But things are looking a little better in the state now. After Driver's death, Maryland Department of Health & Mental Hygiene Secretary John M. Colmers created a Dental Action Committee to make concrete recommendations on what could be done to increase access of dental care providers for lower-income people. One of the key recommendations was a $44 million grant to raise Medicaid reimbursement rates equal to the median charges in the Atlantic region. Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley's proposed budget – released yesterday – requests $16.1 million, including $14 million to increase Medicaid reimbursement rates ($7 million from the state, matched by the federal government); $1.4 million for two new dental clinics in regions that currently don't have them; and $700,000 for a mobile dental clinic to serve the school system. Colmers said they hope to phase-in the $44 million Medicaid allotment over 3 years.
"We're not going to solve these problems overnight," Colmers told me. "This is a substantial down-payment towards reaching our goals."
Raskin agreed. "You feel the difference between having Democrats and Republicans in state office on an issue like this. The Democrats really feel that the maldistribution of dental care is a scandal and are willing to pay to get dental care to poor kids. Budget times are tough but this is an excellent use of targeted funds," he said. "The Democrats feel very passionate about this. I talk to constituents who tell me that the quality of dental care people receives has become a very good predictor of how well they will progress in the work force and how well they will do in life. Dental care is key to individual opportunity in America."
Although there has been much talk about healthcare reform in the presidential campaign, there has been little mention of dental care. The Obama and Edwards campaigns declined to comment for this article. Ann Lewis, Senior Advisor at Hillary Clinton for President, pointed to a recent speech Senator Clinton delivered in Iowa where she made her commitment to dental coverage clear – and it happened to touch on Deamonte Driver's death: "I want to cover dental care. And in the congressional plan, which I open up to everybody...there are more than 250 plan choices. Most of them cover dental care. One of the things we are finding out is all of the connections between dental problems and heart disease, between dental problems and other systemic conditions. So, if we don't cover dental care, you're going to miss a lot of the problems that will then get very expensive...I talked about the story of a young boy, 12-years old, living in Maryland… had a toothache. [His mother] couldn't find a dentist to take him because they didn't have any money for a dentist. They called every dentist they could get and some were very sympathetic, but they said, ‘Well, we already have our full compliment of charity patients. We can't take anybody else.' Turned out he had an abscess. The abscess burst, so he ends up in Johns Hopkins Hospital. They tried to save him. He dies. The hospital incurred $300,000 worth of medical care trying to save him because his mother couldn't get a $60, $70, $80…dental visit. So that's the kind of story that underscores the unfairness of the system, but also the importance of covering dental care, and I intend to do everything I can to make that happen."
It's good to see some Democrats on the Hill – and in the statehouses – working so hard to craft a sane and humane response to this epidemic. Much remains to be done, but there are good people who will keep this on the radar and continue this fight.
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on what’s in the news and what’s not--but should be.
RSS
Thanks, Katrina, for spotlighting an issue that deserves significantly more attention than it's gotten so far.
Off the topic, but worthwhile is this recent Sasha Abramsky snippet at Mother Jones.
Eugene Debs, Meet Bobby Kennedy
Excerpt:
Back in '04, I'd found Edwards somewhat syrupy. In Carson City, by contrast, he was magnetic. And in the year since he has honed his message and his delivery still further.
Dressed in a casual black shirt and jeans, in the sweaty intimacy of a crowded union hall--big carpenters sitting on the platform behind him, muscular 1930s-styled union posters adorning the walls--Edwards decried the state of Bush's America. There was a rage, and a passion to his presentation that went well beyond simply hamming it up to the crowd.
To my mind, his words are worth quoting at length. They have the barnstorming fury of a Eugene Debs, perhaps a later-years Bobby Kennedy.
On the war on terror: "Here's a radical idea. How about we have a President of the United States who believes in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? I will close Guantanamo, which is an embarrassment. No renditions. There will be no torture permissible."
On labor: "When I am President and it becomes necessary for you to go on strike, when you're walking that picket line, nobody, nobody will walk through that line and take your job from you."
On corporate profiteering and widespread poverty: "I see an America where last year Exxon Mobil made $40 billion and the CEO of one of the largest health care companies made $200 million. And I contrast it with a picture of 40 million Americans who have no health care coverage and have to go to the emergency room to get treatment. Thirty seven million will wake up literally worried about feeding their families and children. Children are living on the streets in America--while Exxon Mobil made $40 billion. Last year 35 million went hungry in America. Enough is enough..........
Edwards may well not win the nomination--though he's still a serious contender...... But as long as Edwards is in the race, the issues of poverty and justice are going to be talked about in a way, and with a passion, that hasn't been seen in mainstream politics for decades.
--I believe that the vast majority of Nationheads would love to see the fire of John Edwards stick around for a long, long time, regardless of how long Edwards himself can manage to keep burning.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/18/2008 @ 9:34pm
Curious, the Europeans have dental care and yet they still have bad teeth.
Posted by ACook at 01/18/2008 @ 9:52pm
KVH: ....improving reimbursement rates and the availability of dentists is necessary in order for poor kids to avoid long waiting lists and get the timely services needed.
As someone who wasn't blessed w/strong teeth/gum, but much healthier than average overall, I see Dentists a fair bit. The point is, as a `heavy user', I know almost ALL dental care is really quite routine....even Deep Cleaning, scary as it sounds, is a low-tech affair.
Most Dentists are over trained for the very routine work they do. Anyhow, the best solution to increase "availability of service for poor kids", is to allow Dental Hygienists to open their own neighborhood dental centers. They must be trained to spot (not treat) bigger problems and refer patients to Dentists and other specialists as needed. Stripped of the overhead of a full-blown Dental office, routine care should be affordable, cash only to eliminate admin. costs, and convenient.
Imagine how many folks would become Hygienists if all they need is an Assoc. Degree plus 1 to 2 years of basic dental care training that includes cleaning, X-rays, filling (early/shallow) cavities and administering local anesthesia! That $100 visit becomes $40 to $50!
Lastly, good dental care for children begins with good parental care of their kids--impossible to legislate! Folks, getting children to floss is impossible but make sure you floss your own teeth every single night!
Posted by Happy at 01/18/2008 @ 10:32pm
Not to get too "nasty", but what is Senator Cardin's STAFF's source for that declaration on tooth decay?
My Google shows "asthma, epilepsy,sickle cell disease and rheumatic heart disease" as the chief chronic childhood illneses, with one mention of arthritis.
Far be it from me to question a politician's staff when it comes to medical data....but I will.
But willing to be proved wrong...with objective evidence?
Posted by Mask at 01/18/2008 @ 10:34pm
Curious, the Europeans have dental care and yet they still have bad teeth.
Posted by ACOOK 01/18/2008 @ 9:52pm | ignore this person
not anymore. when have you been in Europe? oh I forgot dimwit, you just make things up.
Posted by johannesrolf1 at 01/18/2008 @ 10:50pm
education on this subject is crucial. insurance too.
Posted by johannesrolf1 at 01/18/2008 @ 10:51pm
Posted by JOHANNESROLF1 01/18/2008 @ 10:50pm
I see the old goat has returned. Time to put a call into the NY ASPCA and tell them you're on the loose again.
Posted by ACook at 01/18/2008 @ 11:06pm
Posted by JOHANNESROLF1 01/18/2008 @ 10:50pm
I had to look at the last post and realized that you're not JR, you're an imposter posing as he.
Posted by ACook at 01/18/2008 @ 11:26pm
education on this subject is crucial. insurance too.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF1 01/18/2008 @ 10:51pm
JR,
Glad to see you're here. Agreed 100%
I can't quite figure out exactly why it is that with our medical coverage, our teeth and eyes aren't considered parts of our body so we have to seek other coverage for taking care of them.
Another interesting thing to think about with this medical coverage is eye care. Maybe someone can enlighten me about this one. Eye coverage on most policies will pay up to a certain amount of $$ for glasses or contact lenses, but if you wish to opt for surgery to correct your vision to 20/20 they won't pay for that? So, it would seem that they prefer people to be blind and paying insurance premiums instead of having people with good vision running around.
You folks who are believe so strongly in the private market in the medical field have some explaining to do on this. Insurance is for profit, and when you base healthcare on that type of system, the patients health is the last thing considered by the insurers. Maybe people are right, there isn't anything wrong with the healthcare in the U.S., maybe it's strictly the insurance industry that should be scruitnized. They are the ones dictating to doctors what to do, playing God on who gets to receive certain treatments and who doesn't etc. Maybe this particular industry needs a little more oversight than we have at present.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/19/2008 @ 07:12am
Posted by PLAIN BRUCE 01/18/2008 @ 11:53pm
"Just because there's no evidence, doesn't mean it isn't true"!?!?!?
That's religion...not science.
Posted by Mask at 01/19/2008 @ 09:51am
Jesus H. Christ! Dental care?! This is the last bastion of medicine that hasn't been completely raped and mutilated by insurance. The average person can actually still afford to visit the dentist without insurance. Yep, out of pocket folks. I know it's a bizarre concept for most of you.
I swear, within our lifetimes we are going to "help" ourselves to death! By the time our kids are our age health care will be completely ruined. If we stay on this path, everyone in the country will have equal access to universally shitty medicine. Whoopty-Doo!
We won't even know the meaning of black market drugs and back alley services until the government takes over health care. Those who can afford it will still get the best (so Katrina's kids are safe, thank God!). It will be a complete and absolute disaster for the "little people." I have a hard time believing that someone as educated as Katrina doesn't know this, or can't at least think it through. She's capable of it. She can put two and two together. She can learn from the history of her beloved USSR or the great and wonderful East German health care industry. She can look at modern examples such as Canada and Brittan. There's something else at hand here, people. Open your little eyes to it.
Posted by Person at 01/19/2008 @ 10:25am
Posted by PLAIN BRUCE 01/19/2008 @ 11:28am
And I didn't say my view was set in stone....just show me more evidence than the research of ...a politician's staff!
Posted by Mask at 01/19/2008 @ 1:58pm
Dental care is not a luxury. The first mortality table ever recorded for a city was drawn up in London in the 14th century. The leading cause of death was given as "teeth." Old-fashioned doctors used to call a triangle stretching from the ears to the top of the head the "devil's triangle," because infections there can so often result in death. And now of course we know the generally debilitating effects of a chronic, low-grade infection in the mouth-- heart infections and a weakened immune system. I have friends who are forced to glue their teeth together with super glue, a friend with abscesses who was told that the state of Oregon would pull his front teeth but not replace them.
Our myopia about this is just another example of the national knack for overlooking huge stinky lumps, big as beached whales, hidden under the carpet.
Posted by iship at 01/19/2008 @ 2:39pm
We don't need no stinkin' universal health care. Let things stay as they are so that all of us American freedom loving people won't have to wait for socialistic medical or dental attention. Let those working Americans who can't afford the premiums and surely not the cost of treatment stay home, pray and hope for the best. Just ask Pat Robertson or Jim Dobson to help us vote in the name of Jesus for all those Republican patriots who will support us in our struggle against un-American ideology as God wants us all to do.
Posted by Suasponte at 01/19/2008 @ 4:10pm
Posted by ISHIP 01/19/2008 @ 2:39pm | ignore this person
You are a complex person, ISHIP. You socialize with hillbillies and yet you use words like "myopia." Do you dumb down your vocabulary for your friends with the glued teeth? I shudder to think of how they treat yeast infections!
Posted by Person at 01/19/2008 @ 5:07pm
Let those working Americans who can't afford the premiums and surely not the cost of treatment stay home, pray and hope for the best.
Posted by SUASPONTE 01/19/2008 @ 4:10pm | ignore this person
ISHIP's hillbilly friends demonstrate that even those who can't afford city slicker medicine can make do. You need more faith in folk's ability to care for themselves. Your sense of duty to your fellow American is touching, but misdirected. Have you ever considered channeling that passion into charity work, or some non-governmental form of aid for the downtrodden?
Posted by Person at 01/19/2008 @ 5:13pm
I agree this is a significant issue--there are so many of them right now. Thanks for highlighting the problems with the dental care system.
But I would like to add another point. Democrats I feel have not been explaining the reasons why this and many other problems have become so serious. While there are some progressive voices on talk shows now and there are magazines and ezines like this one, I still can't think of a single national Democrat who is making the case for a complete change in the political structure. I think many people understand how different the reality of their daily lives is--low pay, longer hours, and more. But I don't think they are aware of how all the pieces of the New Deal fit together and why they worked so well. I remember, when I was a boy, how firm the voting population was about voting Democratic. People understood in a meaningful way not just that they should support the Democrats if they were middle class, but they understood why too. Many current Democrats instead seem to want to compromise and work towards "bipartisan" solutions. The problem with this is the other side isn't playing this game. I think there is a significant vacuum in the public's understanding of why their current reality is the way it is and that is because no major politician is explaining it to them. I don't mean to slight Kucinich or Edwards here, they are doing their best but their voices are suppressed by our corporate media. Where are the other voices to help back them up?
Posted by Erik at 01/19/2008 @ 8:49pm
Where are the other voices to help back them up?
Posted by ERIK 01/19/2008 @ 8:49pm
ERIK, Very good question indeed. I still maintain that the political views of this country have swayed so far to the right that the new deal democratic party is dead. When we have corporate interests dominating both sides of the equation via the democratic and republican parties and choosing those who are the finalists we get to choose from in the primaries, the game is over even before it's started. As everyone can see, Hillary and Barrack are pretty much republicans of old...their stances aren't much different than those of Richard Nixon or Bush Senior.
Compromising with the neocons will not help the average American out but rather offshore their jobs, lower their pay, remove what benefits we have left and increase our work hours. If that's the view you rethug and middle of the road dems want, then we are well on our way to a new sort of deal...one that really sucks.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/20/2008 @ 4:27pm
Compromising with the neocons will not help the average American out but rather offshore their jobs, lower their pay, remove what benefits we have left and increase our work hours. If that's the view you rethug and middle of the road dems want, then we are well on our way to a new sort of deal...one that really sucks.
Posted by WOLFGANG1 01/20/2008 @ 4:27pm | ignore this person
That's such ignorant gobbledygook, I don't know where to begin.
Posted by Person at 01/20/2008 @ 5:03pm
That's such ignorant gobbledygook, I don't know where to begin.
Posted by PERSON 01/20/2008 @ 5:03pm
How ignorant you are and evidently nothing will wake you up. So, go ahead and believe the ignorant gobbledygook you believe in. You will vote for people who will slit their own throats for a buck today and loose everything tomorrow. You can't see past the end of your nose.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/20/2008 @ 6:12pm
Have you ever considered channeling that passion into charity work, or some non-governmental form of aid for the downtrodden?
Posted by PERSON 01/19/2008 @ 5:13pm
That would be the bullshit trickle down theory from the Reagan administration. It didn't work then and doesn't work now. What you would have is a system where the scraps the rich feel like throwing down to the undeserving dogs (that would be the rest of the American people). People shouldn't have to depend upon the charity of others because others may not feel that damned charitable. I would have a hard time picturing the likes of Cheney, Bush, Rove, Rice etc. caring for anyone but themselves.
You should take note that when the wallstreet weenie heads start whining because they lose some profits, W and company jump into action. The rest of this nation can sink like the friggin Titanic and they don't blink an eye.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/20/2008 @ 6:18pm
and loose
Sorry, meant to say lose.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/20/2008 @ 6:29pm
erik, thank you--yours is one of most thoughtful and thought-provoking posts/comments in a very long time. What you write is so true--yet, perhaps, these are times when there is no single person, leader, whether Dem or indpt or moral or political, but good people, millions of them, trying to find their way and take action as best they can to rebuild a country they love...I believe in social change from below--but, at same time, agreeing with you, believe we need a person or a group of people to connect the dots, to use an overworked expression. The New Deal was a transformative political time and we are in that kind of time now, though even with the horrible foreclosures, the pain and insecurity millions feel, and looming recession, not a 1930s Depression. But what is the new New Deal political coalition? Labor is so weakened. After three decades of conservative attack on the New Deal, we need to rebuild. Every day I learn about people across this country trying to rebuild --our dysfunctional electoral system, for example (the new Secretaries of State of CA, Ohio and MN are extraordinary and doing work to expand not close down access and possibility); and local activists..but we need the glue --whether a party which organizes and doesn't just rake in the $ --and Howard Dean's DNC with its 50-state strategy is working to do this (and see Laura Flanders' cover story in the Nation this coming week to get some insight how this is working and succeeeding and why we can't allow it to be shut down ...) ....more to say, but wanted to thank you, Erik, for your most thoughtful comment.kvh
Posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel at 01/20/2008 @ 7:37pm
I was happy to see Katrina van den Heuvel posting (January 2008) regarding dental care. There is a definite need for dental care for all (as part of national health care) for reasons beyond the ones she covered. Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease can gain access through oral routes more easily with bad teeth. Many researchers think that is why variant CJD spread so rapidly in the U.K. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (in its so-called sporadic form) has long been in the States but we cannot get much media coverage of it. My father died of it. His possible mode of transmission: He ate goat brains with a partially missing tooth. (His elderly dentist said if the tooth didn't bother Daddy, it didn't bother him. Neither of them were aware of the risks of eating TSE-tainted beef or animal brains with a bad tooth.) CJD (all of the TSEs) are fatal degenerative brain diseases and as each jumps species it increases in infectivity. [Some good books on the subject of TSEs include Deadly Feasts by Rhodes, the Pathological Protein, Mad Cow U.S.A.)
Posted by Speak of TSEs at 01/20/2008 @ 8:38pm
Hey Katrina,
I saw you on This Week with Stephanopoulos today. I loved the assertive insertion of the point you made about John McCain getting a free ride from the media on his "straight talk" label, and that he is the friendly face of warmongering.
Excellent stuff.
And it's fun to watch George Will screw his face up when he's listening to you!
Cheers, ~BK
:D
Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/20/2008 @ 8:43pm
Posted by KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL 01/20/2008 @ 7:37pm
Katrina, Yes, but the inverse of Bush seniors political slogan. Remember the thousands of lights he saw from his airplane of "the people". The inverse is the reality instead of millions of people standing up for working Americans. We have a handful on our side against an army of paid political mercenaries in the form of lobbyists on the other. Those lobbyists in general represent big business and leave Americans in the background.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/20/2008 @ 8:59pm
That would be the bullshit trickle down theory from the Reagan administration.
Posted by WOLFGANG1 01/20/2008 @ 6:18pm | ignore this person
Nope. Just good nature and caring. It really exists, believe it or not.
People shouldn't have to depend upon the charity of others...
Oh? Then upon whom or what should they depend? I'd say "one's self" is the best answer, but I doubt you'd agree. The point of charity isn't to create dependents.
People shouldn't have to depend on the charity of others...? Your premise is that people are naturally un-charitable. Therefore they must be forced by government (or suffer punishment) to forfeit their personal property for use by others. If people are naturally un-charitable, then who makes up the government? People, right? Is it possible that rotten, greedy humans in government will abuse the power to confiscate people's private property? I'll bet it's a great breeding ground for the corrupt. Much more so than, say, your local church.
I would have a hard time picturing the likes of Cheney, Bush, Rove, Rice etc. caring for anyone but themselves.
Sounds to me like you have a hard time picturing kindness in any individual, ergo compulsory charity in the form of taxation.
Posted by Person at 01/21/2008 @ 07:35am
Sounds to me like you have a hard time picturing kindness in any individual, ergo compulsory charity in the form of taxation.
Posted by PERSON 01/21/2008 @ 07:35am
That's exactly right. I don't think the poor should have to rely on the charity of the wealthy to just be able to stay alive. Of course there are good people out there who donate to charities and the like, and of course there are people out there who are free loaders who don't want to do anything but sit on their butts and collect their welfare check.
I don't argue either of those facts. But there are people out there who are trying the best they can and are working and don't have insurance, barely have enough money to pay the rent, cloth the kids and commute back and forth to work etc. I know because I work with such people. You'll really like this one. The most charitable people I see are the ones who have the least to give.
I just saw on the news where a financial guru was recommending that lower and middle economical class people keep their rebate in the form of this tax rebate Bush wants to give out to stimulate the economy. These financial folks are telling people to keep that money and not spend it because they know the lower and middle class people are broke and getting worse off by the day.....something about a looming recession and the like. Bushco is gambling that the lower and middle class folks have no choice but to spend it. I fear Bushco is correct on this one.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/21/2008 @ 08:44am
I know because I work with such people.
I see this comment often. Why are the poor so under represented in this forum? Are we just a bunch of rich people talking to one another? You work with the uninsured, some other guy has freinds who glue their teeth... Where do you guys live, anyway?
The most charitable people I see are the ones who have the least to give.
I do like that one. It is, of course, purely anecdotal, but it's heartening to hear. Oprah and Bill Gates might argue that the charity of only a few wealthy individuals surpasses that of many poor in terms of raw dollars. But I get your point. And, hey, voluntary charity is magnanimous in any form.
It's something that you and I are unlikely to agree upon, but I strongly disagree with having such a "helpful" government. It's not to say that people aren't having a tough time - people have had, are having, and always will have a tough time. But this doesn't justify conscripting my charity or confiscating the fruits of my labor. You and I know best how to spend what we earn. Would you even consider allowing me, personally, to control a portion of your money? If so, I'll give you my home phone number, and we'll work out the details.
I am sympathetic to the hardships of others. Indeed, I suffer my own hardships. But I am seeking my own solutions to my own problems. They aren't your problems, they aren't Katrina's problems, they are mine. And I will be far better off in the long run having dealt with them myself, no matter how much it sucks.
Posted by Person at 01/21/2008 @ 10:12am
"I don't know where to begin."
Posted by PERSON 01/20/2008 @ 5:03pm | ignore this person
The only sentiment that wasn't vacuously rabid. And also the truest I've yet to hear you express. If only you meant it.
Posted by V at 01/21/2008 @ 12:54pm
Oh, BTW, Erik and Katrina, you need to start a new political party. It seems like the Democratic Party is fractured. You have "conservative", moderate, and liberal Dems. I'll be if the truly liberal Dems formed their own party they could garner enough support to win some elections and build momentum.
The same might be true on the Republican side as well, with truly conservative Republicans forming their own party. The moderate Democrats and Republicans that remain could form their own party. They really aren't that much different, anyway.
Maybe this way we'd have some real choices and possibly have a little more political consumer confidence.
Posted by Person at 01/21/2008 @ 1:44pm
"Why are the poor so under represented in this forum"
Because the poor can't afford the internet in order to sit around and bicker on it... just a possibility. I mean if I couldn't even afford to get a doctor to look at my teeth why would I paying for the internet?
"Nope. Just good nature and caring. It really exists, believe it or not."
It does exist but usually amongst those who don't have the ability to give a lot. Sure people like Oprah and Gates give generously but few of the money holders in this country do. Would you really contend that someone who used every dirty trick, who has walked over people lower in caste than him/her, who robbed the poor of jobs by shipping them overseas for higher profit and used every other dirty trick in the book to make their millions or billions (which is what makes up most of corporate America) is going to then give money back to those people they took the jobs out from under?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/21/2008 @ 2:37pm
the usual lazy article asking for funds to throw at a serious problem without daring to look for and then name the numbers that matter. how about telling us how much care the public would get for the proposed expenditures? how about educating the reader on how much of the money would be given away to greedy dental-care professionals and those who produce and peddle to them fantasy-priced supplies? how about discussing how countries do it whose dental care is not for profit but effective? most of these considerations are also conspicuously absent from the "debate" on "reforming" healthcare. some are mentioning hmo's profits as a non-sense to eliminate and that's good, but most are too lazy to run the numbers on doctors' salaries and predatorily priced supplies, and to propose ways to increase the number of doctors and to educate better, less greedy doctors and nurses. even a call for more market efficiency could be made. it's ok that "The Nation"-type of "progressive" nowadays prefers to ask for more money and to leave power structures unmentioned lest he/she be compelled to ask for public ownership of something. but why at least not to ask for more effective markets through market regulation ? when the market allows huge profits to be made and very little bang for the buck is delivered, the market is not working properly and must be intervened. even right-wing people buy that and would welcome a crack down on hmos, doctors, and suppliers. concededly, wearing miniskirts and authoring books with oh-so-enlightened witticisms chastising the oh-so-bad republicans is much more fun. try a bikini for the next cover, kathy pie ! ;)
efpressinals?
Posted by erplus at 01/21/2008 @ 11:45pm
It is terrible when there is death from simple, treatable conditions.However, there will never be a true solution from our "Disease Care" (aka "health care")system. Most disease and dental decay comes from SAD diet(the Standard American Diet)and lifestyle which destroys the body's balance. No amount of "Disease Care" will solve the problem until we wake up and take responsibility for our health.
Meanwhile while we wait for folks to wake up, I agree with another comment about getting simple medical and dental procedures out of the overworked and over priced doctor's hands and give them to the many competent hygienist and nurses etc..
By the way, dental decay is not caused from bacteria working on food creating acid. It is caused by teeth weakened by a bad diet. When the teeth are weakened they easily decay from the normal bacteria in your mouth (bacteria that you can never get rid of).
I used to be for a single payer health care system but then I realized the only hope for bringing down health care (disease care) costs is to give people incentives to stay healthy which means each person pays (even health insurance corrupts that incentive). Otherwise we will have another boondoggle like the Prescription Drug benefit one hundred times over.
Posted by longview at 01/22/2008 @ 10:47pm
I used to be for a single payer health care system but then I realized the only hope for bringing down health care (disease care) costs is to give people incentives to stay healthy which means each person pays (even health insurance corrupts that incentive). Otherwise we will have another boondoggle like the Prescription Drug benefit one hundred times over.
Posted by LONGVIEW 01/22/2008 @ 10:47pm
I agree. People do need to be proactive in their own care and take care of themselves. That would alleviate a lot of problems for them down the road. However, there are people who do take care of themselves, eat right, exercise etc. and still get cancer, MS, high cholesterol etc. and need treatment but can't afford it. The insurance premiums are too high and their choice is between eating and paying the bills or being out on the street, so they choose to drop their health coverage insurance because it doesn't directly effect their situation though in the long term it does.
Kind of like if you have a retirement account or not. You don't notice it until you retire. If you have one, great, but if you didn't have the money to save for one, you're in hot water when you get older. Most of us can pretty much scatch social security for example. If people are counting on that for their survival, they are going to be in for one hell of a surprise.
The quality of life varies from one person to another and there are many variables that have effects on the quality of life. How much money do you have coming in, your health, how many dependents do you have, where do you live etc. People need to be responsible for their acts, but they also need help from time to time when things overwhelm them. People like W would take what safety net people have and give it to the wealthy who don't need a safety net.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/23/2008 @ 08:13am
As noted sporadically throughout, this is not a "new" revelation although perhaps with the healthcare crisis we are starting to look at aspects of health care we chose to ignore these many years. I myself can add data to this tally. While living in HI some years back (1989 I think?) a fellow on public assistance was trying to get a tooth extracted. He couldn't find a dental surgeoan on the Big Island willing to take on a "welfare case." Weeks later DHHS finally got him to Honolulu where the dentist was amazed by the size of the abcess. It was drained, and the tooth pulled - but too little, too late. He succumbed to infection about a week after.
Now I honestly don't know what his story was, but that a man died from a toothache in a nation where so many crow about the standard of living, and the quality (if not availability) of medical treatment should be abhorrent to any rational being.
Posted by leftofcenter at 01/23/2008 @ 11:21am
Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 01/23/2008 @ 11:21am
rational.................................
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/23/2008 @ 11:34am
There isn't any place else to post this idea, but I thought I'd float it out there to see what some of you think...this is the Editors page, so maybe, just maybe she'll see this.
We have a serious problem in our nation with energy consumption as well as importing oil from countries that inflate the price to maximize profits. What if the federal government came up with a new deal. This deal would be to retrofit existing cars to either run on ethanol, convert them to hybrids or hydrogen hybrid cars. This could be done via tax break, partial funding etc. The car companies would make a fortune off labor and parts and engineering this, there would be a ton of mechanic and engineering jobs, and people wouldn't have to purchase new vehicles to be able to utilize alternative energy sources. So, this type of project would have to be overseen by the government do the scope and size, but implemented via bids by car companies, universities, private companies and individuals etc. It would ween us off our oil dependency and allow us to give the finger to the middle east while at the same time really stimulating our economy.
Or, another idea would be to have a federally controlled mass transit system for the whole country. Once again, bidded out to contractors etc. This would also make us more energy independent and would allow us to give the finger to the middle east countries.
Any takers out there?
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 01/23/2008 @ 11:41am
Any takers out there?
Posted by WOLFGANG1 01/23/2008 @ 11:41am
not any that "matter".
Posted by frosty zoom at 01/23/2008 @ 12:59pm
KVH BLOG Posted 01/18/2008 @ 9:12pm – in part:
"…the national epidemic of dental disease…"
I was wondering what the next "crisis de jour" would be. Next week look for "Crisis of the Lost", how the poor are being forced to drive without GPS.
Ms VH, it appears to me that you ain't happy unless you ain't happy
Posted by Econ Major at 01/23/2008 @ 9:35pm