Rep. Pitts: 'We need the right kind of reform'

Health Care Reform Must Be Patient Centered

By Congressman Joe Pitts

We have a health care crisis in this country. Most people reading this know someone who is without insurance, or who has encountered catastrophic costs that are jeopardizing their financial standing. And we have simply too many people who do not have access to affordable health coverage. Something must change.

We need reform, but we need the right kind of reform. Almost everyone in Washington can agree that we need change, but the type of reform is critical to ensuring that you have access to quality, affordable health care. Any reform must maintain the doctor-patient relationship while helping to provide coverage for those who cannot afford it.

I stand firmly committed to providing genuine access to affordable, quality health care for every American. In order to accomplish this, we need to pursue a balanced, common sense approach that will guarantee that Americans can receive the care they deserve while protecting the sacred doctor-patient relationship. What we cannot have is a bureaucrat-run system imposed by politicians in Washington that takes away your power to decide health care treatment and denies you the treatments you need, when you need them.

There are two competing ideas regarding health care reform in Washington right now. One seeks to hijack health care and put government bureaucrats in charge, placing your relationship with your doctor in jeopardy. The other seeks to preserve the sacred doctor-patient relationship while reducing cost and increasing coverage. The first plan is being advocated by the President and Democrats in Congress. The second option is the plan I stand behind.

In countries where the government runs a single, one-size-fits all system, people often wait weeks or even months for tests when they are sick. Then they wait weeks or months more for treatment. In these countries, politicians and bureaucrats decide if you'll get the procedure you need, or if you are disqualified because the treatment is too expensive or because you are too old. This is rationed health care. The very sad case of actress Natasha Richardson is a tragic example of someone who did not receive the treatment she could have because of the government-run health system in Canada. This is unacceptable.

In addition, the proponents of a government-run health care plan claim it will decrease costs. This runs contrary to all other evidence from programs run by the government and to the experience of all other countries who have tried government-run health care.

I am pleased the President has been talking about waste, fraud and abuse in government lately. I think his words should lead to greater action, but at least he's talking about the reality of the situation in Washington. What I cannot understand is how someone can say these kinds of things about government waste and at the same time advocate for government ownership of your health care and your treatment decisions.

When the President recently released a detailed budget plan, he called for cuts in some government programs by saying that "there is a lot of money being spent inefficiently, ineffectively, and – in some cases – in ways that are actually pretty stunning." I completely agree. Yet, this is the very same President that wants to take over your health care in the name of saving costs. Government-run health care will not be magically less prone to waste, fraud, and abuse than anything else run by the government.

Instead, we need to retool our system in order to emphasize preventative care and reduce the need for doctors to practice defensive medicine. If we help protect doctors from frivolous lawsuits, they can stop ordering tests that aren't needed and we can use that money to put toward more preventative treatment and better promote wellness.

I will work with the President and my colleagues in Congress to reform our health care system because it needs to be changed. However, reform must start with the principle that doctors and patients should be making health care decisions, not some Washington bureaucracy. Health care must be patient-centered, not government-centered. With these principles, there is no reason we cannot commit to working with him on his stated goals of increasing efficiency and lowering health care costs for all.

I want to make health care coverage portable, so that you can take it from one job to another. Better yet, we should end the discriminatory tax treatment that provides a tax benefit to companies for providing health care, but not individuals for buying their own. I think we ought to allow individuals to band together to pool risk, which will reduce costs. Individuals ought to be able to buy insurance across state lines if they find a plan that works for them. We should be promoting health care IT, which has the potential to cut down on errors and increase the potential of preventative care.

These are just a few of the ideas that can help to reduce costs while preserving the doctor-patient relationship that is vital to quality care. I look forward to working with all parties to find a way to make high-quality health care affordable for everyone.

Congressman Joe Pitts represents the 16th Congressional District of Pennsylvania.