Guest Column

I feel that deeply ingrained in me is the wisdom that the health of society is crucial to the health of myself. We are all interconnected as we share the same earth, society and the finite resources of both. I have lived in places with great health disparity and observed the resulting costs to the earth and society and believe that the time will come when we will no longer be able to escape the consequences of health and wealth inequity as the resources available to all become more blatantly finite. Health care should be viewed as a guaranteed right for all the citizens of the United States and the government should have the power to legislate more aggressively than it has so far to guarantee access to health care for all. Oregon could soon become a pioneer in innovating health care delivery in U.S. if the HOPE amendment passes the Senate.

In the preamble of the U.S. Constitution, the purpose of government is explained: “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.” I interpret this statement to mean that the purpose of government includes promoting the general welfare of our citizens and society. Oregon should also be able to legislate in such a way as to guarantee the welfare of Oregonians and society.

One way of looking at the cost to society of not having access to health care is to look at the economic cost of health disparities. According to the World Health Organization, health disparities are found when unfair and unavoidable differences in health status are seen in populations (Meyer, Yoon, & Kaufmann, 2013). The European parliament estimates that health inequities cost 1.4 percent of the GDP in the European Union which is close the amount of their defense spending of 1.6% of the GDP (“World Health Organization,” 2012). Of course, just having access to health care as a human right would not bring about total health equity, but it can be argued that access to health care is a key component of reducing health inequity. When viewed in a broader economic sense, reducing health disparities by increasing access to health care would promote the general welfare for citizens and society as is an essential function of government.

Maybe Oregon can utilize broader access to Medicaid as competition to keep the price of alternative insurance and health care down. By passing the Hope Amendment, there may be other ways to guarantee all citizens access to health insurance without going to a single-payer system. In addition, if health care were viewed as human right guaranteed to all, maybe government could have the power to regulate the health care industry with reforms such as caps on administrative salaries, making drug companies transparent about profits for each drug and working towards providing safe-harbor defenses for medical doctors so they don’t order unnecessary tests out of fear (Brill, 2013).

Support of this amendment to the constitution, does not necessarily denote support of a single-payer system in Oregon. There could be many ways in which Oregon could guarantee access to affordable health care for all Oregonians. In fact, I believe in the power of smaller independent practice groups because time and research has shown that the smaller independent practice groups are better at innovation and making cost-effective quality control changes happen fast compared with large health systems (Kocher, 2016). If the HOPE amendment were to pass, government could legislate in such a way as to encourage the success of smaller independent practices that can innovate. This legislation would allow Oregon to continue to be a pioneer in health care delivery while ensuring that every Oregonian has access to affordable health care.

— Anne Ottesen is a registered nurse and lives in Bend.