It looks like Alabama is not the only one making short-sighted decisions regarding the health of children. Arizona lawmakers, looking to one-up the controversial bill they passed in 2010 targeting illegal immigrants, have brought to the floor an omnibus immigration bill with repercussions reaching deep into the unknown. The bill extends to healthcare, with stiff penalties aimed at healthcare providers and hospitals that would dare treat Hispanics without demanding to see their documentation. The bill will certainly draw vocal support from fiscal conservatives and anti-immigration proponents, though it has little basis in reality.
The Arizona Republic highlights the bill's shortcomings in an article by Mary K. Reinhart and Ken Alltucker: "Tucson neonatologist Carlos Flores said the legislative proposals, including co-payments for prenatal care and no-show fees, show a "lack of understanding" about the state's health-care network. Nearly half of Flores' patients are on AHCCCS, and he said barriers to prenatal care and other health services would cost taxpayers more in the long run."
As seems to be more and more common in the current political climate, when financial times get tough, people lose their minds. Conservative commentators continually discuss the federal budget in light of the way a middle class family would run their home - "When things get tight, you've got to make cuts." However, the cuts they are willing to make are chosen in light of two, four or six-year election cycles, with little perspective for the future. "We can't leave our children with any more debt!" is the cry. But stripping programs that are innately long term investments - such as funding for the healthcare of children and scientific research - is like breaking into the kids' college accounts so that you can maintain one's current standard of living. The cuts being demanded by Tea Partiers and libertarians might make the budget look more solvent now, but they will cost future generations.
No comments:
Post a Comment