Congressional candidate Phil Goss says getting rid of “big money” is first step to real health care reform

Letters to the Editor do not reflect the opinions of The Reporter, its publisher or its staff. You can submit your own Letter to the Editor by email to News@ReadTheReporter.com. Please include your phone number and city of residence. The Reporter will publish one letter per person per week.

Dear Editor:

How should we address our problems?

Identifying problems is easy, to an extent. We recognize the inequities in our healthcare system, tax structure, social services, and education policies.

Many of those problems persist because they are complex and cannot be solved with a “Band-Aid” solution or other quick fixes. Increased spending on these issues results in increased prices and costs for everyday Hoosiers.

Achieving greater efficiency and better services for less money is only possible with better management and a more appropriate regulatory environment.

For example, one way to improve health care in the U.S. would be to replace the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) Act of 1973 – a measure that transactionalized health care by allowing health insurance plans to limit coverage to specific in-network providers – with an outcome-based system that protects Americans from conflicts of interest, monopolies, and trusts within the health care industry and prioritizes patient outcomes.

Implementing those changes will take sustained effort from federal lawmakers and an overhaul of our current system, which not only allows but encourages monopolies and vertical integration. Better health care comes from the Department of Commerce, not the Department of Health and Human Services.

Oddly enough, we can look to the re-legalization of alcohol as an example of how appropriate barriers to vertical integration and the prevention of conflicts of interest keep that market competitive, which ultimately protects consumers. After Prohibition, the federal government gave states the ability to regulate alcohol within their borders. While each state has its own alcohol regulations, many use a three-tiered system that clearly separates alcohol producers, wholesalers, and retailers.

Creating a similar system in health care would improve Americans’ collective health significantly. This would require effective involvement from the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Commerce, in addition to the Department of Health and Human Services.

But solving health care isn’t the entire solution. We must also improve our collective nutrition through restrictions on harmful ingredients, similar to those found in other countries. Many other countries restrict the use of ingredients that are known to cause negative health outcomes. We could, but we don’t, because the food and agriculture industries have long controlled federal dietary recommendations.

Adverse health outcomes resulting from the lack of an adequate regulatory structure affect us all. One classification of ingredients in the U.S. is “GRAS” – generally recognized as safe. But the food industry often determines the safety of their own ingredients. Our health is not their priority.

The first matter we must address in order to implement effective change and improved health and health care outcomes in the United States involves getting big money out of the legislative process. This means moving away from Citizens United and returning us to a county of, by, and for the people – not the corporations who are acting in the interests of their own profits at the expense of our well-being.

Phil Goss
Candidate in the Democratic primary for Indiana’s 5^th District Congressional seat