OPINIONWhat editorial writers are saying about health reform after Brown's electionThe victory by Republican Sen. Scott Brown to fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's seat stalls Democratic attempts to pass national health reform legislation.Other Views on Medical News. Posted Feb. 8, 2010. A sampling of newspapers across the nation shows editorial writers' views on what impact the special election of the new senator from Massachusetts has on health system reform. Don't give up nowIt would be a terrible mistake for Democrats to abandon comprehensive health care reform just because voters in the Massachusetts Senate race [Jan. 19] decided that they liked the Republican, Scott Brown, more than the Democrat, Martha Coakley. There is no question that without a filibuster-proof majority it will be a lot harder to pass a bill. But it should not be impossible if congressional Democrats and the White House show courage and creativity. Health care reform is too important to throw away, and it is not too late to persuade voters that it is in their interest. After MassachusettsGo ahead, call the Republicans' bluff: Invite them to the table. Find out if they want to participate or want to obstruct. We think they have some good ideas for curbing health care costs. And you could find a way to get at least some Republicans to join you in a bill that was better focused on providing coverage to people with preexisting conditions. Faux health reformDemocrats are in turmoil. In the wake of [the Jan. 19] Republican Senate victory in liberal Massachusetts, there's no agreement about what to do with the government health care bill. The incredible, shrinking health care overhaulNo doubt the independent voters in Massachusetts, who sent shivers through Washington by filling the late Edward Kennedy's Senate seat with Republican Scott Brown, now hope a chastised Congress will pass a bipartisan bill that attains Obama's goal of affordable health care for all. We would hope the same. Health diplomacyRepublicans say that the Democrats wanted a bipartisan gloss on a Democratic bill, and that -- knowing he had an unshakable 60-vote majority in the Senate -- Mr. Obama didn't bargain in a serious way. With the election to the Senate of Scott Brown (R, Mass.), Mr. Obama no longer has that majority. GOP must do more than just vote no on health-care reformBrown and his fellow Republicans need to be something more than 41 "no" votes in the Senate. Democrats need to address the concerns that led to Brown's election. But just as the health-care crisis didn't go away after 1993, it's not going to go away under a barrage of partisan sniping in 2010. Both parties need to work together to solve these problems by listening to the people and to each other -- or else the people will find someone else to do the job in the November elections. -- Green Bay (Wis.) Press-Gazette, Jan. 25 This content was published online only. Copyright 2010 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
|
Featured stories     
« Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
Next »
Current topicsMost-viewed
This weekUnspent war funds eyed to avoid years of Medicare doctor pay cuts Rite Aid clinics place new twist on "doc-in-a-box" Get our email alertsUse our one-step registration. Learn more Your information will not be shared. Privacy policyColumns and series
From the vaultQuotable"Our goal really is to provide the right care for patients at the right time. Not too much and not too little." Steven Weinberger, MD, co-author of a list developed by the American College of Physicians of 37 clinical situations in which screenings and medical tests provide little or no benefit |
|||||||||
SHARE
