Archive for the 'Economics' Category

A health coverage beneficiary pleads for its reform

bruce hetrick 150x150 A health coverage beneficiary pleads for its reformAs a hearing-impaired, migraine-suffering, diabetic cancer survivor who’s also the father of a cancer survivor and the widower of a cancer victim, I’ve experienced more than my fair share of American health care.

As a professional communicator with a passion for human services, I’ve also spent decades working for health educators, nurses, doctors, hospitals, health advocates and the people who fund all the above.

And as a small-business owner, I’ve evaluated, purchased, and paid for health insurance for my employees and our families.

So as yet another health-reform debate rages, I watch and listen with a vested interest and broad perspective.

Despite my and my family’s health problems, I count myself lucky. I’ve had health coverage for myself, my spouse and my kids throughout my 30-year career. For the most part, the policies have covered what they promised to cover, little haggling required. And when the need was greatest (during my late wife’s cancer battle), our insurance company sped approvals and denied not a single claim.

On the other hand, I have frustrations.

First and foremost, health-care and health-coverage inflation is small-business enemy #1. I know, because I buy a lot of it. My company pays 80 percent of employee premiums and 50 percent of dependent premiums. That’s higher than typical for firms like ours, but it helps us attract and retain good people. It also leaves us with a painful choice: Either the cost of health coverage cuts into our profits or, if passed along to our customers, renders us less competitive.

Second, while insurance covers all kinds of health problems people bring on themselves (through smoking, driving-while-texting, overeating, lack of exercise, etc.), it won’t cover the not-my-fault hearing aids that allow me to function as a wage-earning, tax-paying, job-creating contributor to the economy.

But mostly, I’m irked by rate inequities. While big business gets pricing based on giant risk pools, a lone staff health crisis can send my small company’s rates into the stratosphere.

To wit: My late wife Pam was also my business partner. As such, she was covered by our company’s health insurance.

In the last year of her life, billed charges for Pam’s cancer care totaled $300,000. At renewal time, our company’s health premiums were scheduled to jump 28 percent, a price hike that would seriously affect both the firm’s and employees’ incomes.

But when Pam died just shy of that renewal date, I had our rates re-quoted. With Pam out of the mix, the increase was cut by half.

The biggest inequities of all, of course, are the have-and-have-not chasm caused by our country’s overdependence on employment-based health insurance, and the denial of coverage to those with major maladies and “pre-existing conditions.” One lost job paired with one serious or chronic ailment and you’re a fiscal goner.

Certain politicians and commentators (most of whom, I’d wager, enjoy employer-paid health benefits), argue that we can’t afford to cover everyone.

I’d counter that we can’t afford not to. I’d also predict that the fiscal shock of universal coverage won’t be nearly as great as feared because we’re already paying for everyone—but in the least-effective, most-expensive ways.

Working years ago for a generous, don’t-turn-patients-away-because-of-money, church-founded urban hospital (Methodist), I saw firsthand how few people go without health care. Lacking insurance, they simply get their care in the costliest settings (e.g. emergency rooms) and at the worst possible times (when illnesses and injuries have become far more serious and dangerous than they might have become with timely, appropriate care).

And we all end up paying. Through higher premiums to offset the cost of non-payers. Through charitable contributions to health organizations. Through higher taxes, bankruptcies, lost productivity and more.

There’s an old Fram oil filter commercial that sums up the situation well. Comparing the cost of a new filter to an expensive engine repair, an auto mechanic warns, “You can pay me now. Or you can pay me later.”

In American health care, we’re paying later. And we’re paying through the nose. Our costs, quality and outcomes—compared to other advanced nations—are an embarrassment to the world’s richest economy. Heck, they’d embarrass any civilized society.

As Pam sat in renowned cancer centers and elaborate infusion rooms in Indianapolis and Houston, getting pricey chemotherapy and sophisticated scans, we were grateful for the caregivers, the coverage, the clinical trials, the mere chance at survival.

But we also felt guilty. That we were getting all this because we had money, connections and jobs. Yet all the while, in the greatest nation on earth, others facing the same predicament—citizens with the same right to life and health—were growing sick and dying with no chance whatsoever.

We need health coverage for all. We need it now. No water added. No more excuses. No more delays.

Tens of millions are literally sick of waiting. All the rest are paying the skyrocketing price of procrastination.

Good news

jeff heinzmann 150x150 Good newsLast week, the Indiana Economic Development Corporation, its Small Business Development Center network, Purdue University and the Edward Lowe Foundation announced our second-annual slate of Companies to Watch (CTWs). To qualify, a company must be privately held, employ up to 150 employees and have $750,000 to $100 million in annual revenue or working capital. Fifty companies were chosen from a field of 500 nominees (see the complete list here), and they receive information and advice throughout the coming year from their peers as well as other business leaders.

Amid all the hubbub surrounding these new honorees, however, I decided to revisit last year’s CTWs and see how they stack up against the 2009 list.

Both the 2008 and 2009 classes had 16 companies in either life sciences or manufacturing, and 2009 had another five winners in the health and medical services industry. These companies have grown out of Indiana’s historic manufacturing strength as well as the state’s modern focus on life sciences. But I also see diversity in the first two classes of CTWs. Winners included aircraft servicing, environmental consulting, retail, educational services, and food products and services, to name a few. Indiana CTWs show that no one sector, no one region, and no one industry predetermines success.

Meanwhile, the 2008 winners have thrived in the past year. Chief among them are AIT Labs, which has added hundreds of jobs, instituted an ESOP program and repeatedly delivered bonuses to all its employees. ANGEL Learning was recently acquired for $100 million, and Intercambio Express added jobs in the far north central region of the state. Many Indiana CTWs received other accolades, such as the Mira awards through TechPoint, or recognition by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. By participating in such programs, CTW honorees help develop a true entrepreneurial community across the state. And the IEDC, through the ISBDC network and other programs, is actively engaged in assisting future classes of CTWs, seeking out entrepreneurs and helping them overcome challenges, find resources, and develop sound long-term strategies.

Working with these young companies makes me hopeful for our state’s economic health. These businesses not only represent good news for the economy—they show that the Hoosier entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well.

What have you seen lately that gives you hope for Indiana’s economic future? And what are you contributing to the state’s success?

Dear Fellow Citizen: What in the world were you thinking?

bruce hetrick3 150x150 Dear Fellow Citizen: What in the world were you thinking?Last week, I posted a message on Twitter and Facebook. “It’s time to columnize,” I said. “What issue is ripe for enlightenment (or disparagement)?”

My microcosm erupted.

Tristan tweeted to suggest puppy-mill dogs. “More specifically, the view by their breeders that they’re simply goods to be sold.”

Randy suggested a piece on “the insanity” of legislators pushing a gay marriage ban “when the budget crisis looms and schools are in peril in Indiana.”

My nephew, a college sophomore in Michigan, wrote to suggest a piece on the Recording Industry Association of America and its “abuse of the legal system.”

Will, a recent Notre Dame grad, was interested in the uprising in Iran. “Maybe this can serve as a reminder of a sacred right that we take for granted,” Will said.

Shari suggested another global dilemma: “North Korea’s irrational provocations with nuclear missiles and prison sentences for U.S. journalists.”

Several stressed front-end prevention over back-end problems.

Gene, a South Bend school administrator, suggested “investment in social infrastructure, such as education, family health, etc. instead of paying for the consequences on the other side: prisons, financial dysfunction, higher security cost, etc.”

Laura, a Florida elementary school teacher, thought I might consider “how ‘No Child Left Behind’ has managed to leave more children behind than ever before.”

Sheila and Karla suggested national health reform, with Karla adding, “There is no reform in health reform unless there is prevention. And there is no prevention without . . . [ensuring] that patients and clients are advised about tobacco use and secondhand smoke at each and every visit.”

Julie wanted to know whether I’m for or against the Employee Free Choice Act.

Kim, from Connecticut, suggested a piece on the loss of innocence.

Alice was concerned about the impact of our economic malaise on local arts and culture. “What are we losing and are we aware of what the loss means to us?”

John suggested a piece on “how baseball is a metaphor for the country’s ability to come out of a slump.”

Mary Ann, hoping to make me laugh, suggested a piece on “the impact of televised feuds ala Jon Stewart and Joe Scarborough or, egad, David Letterman and that woman.”

And Nick suggested I delve into “our growing entitlement culture.”

I was contemplating all these suggestions when I opened a message from Gabriel in San Juan. He’d sent a 1968 Robert Kennedy quote.

“We will find neither national purpose nor personal satisfaction in a mere continuation of economic progress, in an endless amassing of worldly goods,” Kennedy said. “We cannot measure national spirit by the Dow Jones Average, nor national achievement by the gross national product. For the gross national product includes air pollution and advertising for cigarettes, and ambulances to clear our highway carnage. It counts special locks for our doors, and jails for the people who break them. The gross national product includes the destruction of the redwoods, and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm and missiles and nuclear warheads . . . It includes the broadcasting of television programs which glorify violence to sell goods to our country.

“And if the gross national product includes all this, there is much that it does not comprehend. It does not allow for the health of our families, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of public officials . . . the gross national product measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile; and it can tell us everything about America—except whether we are proud to be Americans.”

I was feeling proud not only of America, but also of my worldly American friends—with all the “bigger than me” issues weighing on their minds—when my wife arrived home. She’d been listening to the radio.

“Did you hear what Newt Gingrich said?” she asked.

I hadn’t.

“He said ‘I am not a citizen of the world.’ Can you believe that?”

I Googled “citizen of the world.”

Last July in Berlin, Barack Obama described himself as “a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.” In 1982, President Reagan told the United Nations General Assembly, “I speak today as both a citizen of the United States and of the world.”

Yet this month, Newt Gingrich said, “Let me be clear. I am not a citizen of the world. I think the entire concept is intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous.”

Okay, microcosm, weigh in: Is global citizenship “intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous”? Or does beyond-your-own-borders thinking make you proud to be an American?