Undercooked Blog Posts on Disability and Health Insurance: Part 4

Blue Caduceus symbol representing the medical profession

I keep wanting to write some kind of definitive take on disability and health insurance. Unfortunately, the speed and sheer absurdity of the Trump Administration and Republican Congress' American Health Care Act forces me to slap together more of series of thoughts, and hope they do some good. At the very least, it will do me some good to try.

I decided to hold off on the final post until after the House vote on the AHCA was resolved one way or another, or, you know, ANOTHER.

Part 1: 5 Basic Points - March 18, 2017

Part 2: A Tortured Analogy - March 19, 2017

Part 3: Questions for Lawmakers - March 20, 2017

Post Four: A Positive Message, or What Do We Actually Want?

So, now that the American Health Care Act has been withdrawn ... this version of it anyway ... what kind of health insurance system would actually be good for disabled people? Put another way, if Hillary Clinton were President and there were slight Democratic majorities in Congress, what would the disability community be fighting for in health care?

I don't think we as a movement should spend too much time trying to decide which grand health care scheme we should endorse. Instead, let's focus on what disabled people, specifically, need from ANY health care system.

I would like to suggest three possible criteria:

1. No out of pocket price difference or service restrictions, regardless of disability.

2. Long term care at least as strong and community-based as found in the best state Medicaid programs.

3. Full eligibility for disabled people, regardless of employment status or income.

It may take years before we can once again really focus on disability health care policy we want, and in the meantime, we will probably have to keep playing defense. But just in case we are ever asked, "What do you really want then?" I think it's a good idea to remind ourselves what we are actually after.

What do you want to see in health care policy for disabled people?

Undercooked Blog Posts on Disability and Health Insurance: Part 3

Blue Caduceus symbol representing the medical profession

I keep wanting to write some kind of definitive take on disability and health insurance. Unfortunately, the speed and sheer absurdity of the Trump Administration and Republican Congress' American Health Care Act forces me to slap together more of series of thoughts, and hope they do some good. At the very least, it will do me some good to try.

I will post 4 blogs in all, starting today and winding up on Tuesday. The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on the AHCA on Thursday.

Part 1: 5 Basic Points - March 18, 2017

Part 2: A Tortured Analogy - March 19, 2017

Post Three: 3 Questions for Lawmakers

All cynicism and partisanship aside, there are lawmakers who seem like decent people, but support cruel, nonsensical policies because they believe in AN IDEA. Right now, they are mostly Republicans, and they usually have more selfish motives for regressive tax-cutting and dismantling, rather than improving a moderately successful program like Obamacare. But most of them also say they are motivated by something like idealism ... for instance, belief in rewarding and incentivizing hard work, or giving people "a stake" in health care by making sure everyone has to pay something for it.

I would like to ask these members of Congress three questions about how their beliefs and ideals play out in the real world for disabled people:

1. Do you believe that when the government provides material support for poor people ... things like health insurance, disability, food stamps ... it is fundamentally bad for them?

2. Do you think that capping or cutting Medicaid will prompt significant numbers of disabled people to get jobs, and earn more money than they do now? Do you think that having to pay more for health insurance will make disabled people suddenly get healthier, and pursue cost-saving cures and therapies we previously ignored?

3. Do you believe it is better for people with significant disabilities if the government to pays for nursing home fees, rather than the cost of home care?

There is obviously some slant to these questions. The "right" and "wrong" answers are implied. At the same time, I think they are legitimate, honest questions Congress people should at least have to answer before they vote.

Undercooked Blog Posts on Disability and Health Insurance: Part 2

Blue Caduceus symbol representing the medical profession

I keep wanting to write some kind of definitive take on disability and health insurance. Unfortunately, the speed and sheer absurdity of the Trump Administration and Republican Congress' American Health Care Act forces me to slap together more of series of thoughts, and hope they do some good. At the very least, it will do me some good to try.

I will post 4 blogs in all, starting Saturday and winding up on Tuesday. The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on the AHCA on Thursday.

Part 1: 5 Basic Points - March 18, 2017

Part 2: A Tortured Analogy

I worry a lot ... probably too much ... about overstating how awful and / or evil the Republicans' plans for health care are. Although I believe that more disabled people WILL DIE if the AHCA is passed, I don't believe that anyone of consequence actually wants that to happen ... apart from maybe the odd Twitter troll or Bannon acolytes who enjoy dispassionately discussing the benefits of having fewer disabled people to around to weaken our bloodline or whatever.

To me, the question of intent is almost beside the point. You can do a lot of damage to disabled people accidentally, and that's usually how we get hurt, both on the policy and personal levels.

I'm a small guy, 4 feet tall, and not super steady on my feet. Whenever I think of the danger to disabled people when hostile or indifferent politicians and activists get excited about big ideas and big changes, I think of myself trying not to get knocked over or trampled at a frat party. It's not that the revelers around me mean any harm. The problem is they don't notice I am there at all until it's too late. All they can do after backing into me is slur, "Oh, sorry little buddy ... didn't see you there!" and wander off. You see, they are busy doing other things, and they don't need to have it out for me to hurt me ... indifference is more than enough.

Politics is like that for disabled people, for the disability community. People have these other objectives and assumptions that may or may not be fine as far as they go, but they only rarely take the time to check and really see whether what they are doing will work for us, or whether their awesome ideas just don't apply to us.

By the way, this is somewhat of a nonpartisan phenomenon. I had to be careful in parties at my own fraternity in college, even though I felt comfortable with these people and they had a pretty good idea of my unique situation. The main reason I didn't support Bernie Sanders' Presidential run is that he never really took the time to convince the disability community that, for instance, "Medicare For All" would include the same or better home care and community services we get from Medicaid. I don't think for a moment that Sanders wants to institutionalize disabled people, but I'm still not sure he understands how that risk relates to health care proposals, even ones lots of disabled people would otherwise support.

At the moment, however, we are all living in a straightforwardly hostile frat, where angry, hyped up, brothers seem set on making the most of a newly won and unprecedented degree of freedom. They really do want to party like it's 1955, and we can easily get trampled in the process, because it seems like we simply do not exist in their vision of American Greatness.