Health Care: Let's Focus on Areas of Agreement First
Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
September 11, 2009

While home in August, I had the chance to visit with thousands of South Dakotans from communities across the state, to listen to them and have a robust discussion of health care, energy, agriculture, veterans policy and a number of other topics. It was a busy month and with Congress now back in session, the issue of health care is front and center. As I've said before, I believe that our country can’t afford not to reform health care. Our system can and must be reformed because the status quo is unsustainable. There is simply too much at stake for South Dakota’s families and businesses.

I was pleased to hear the President in a recent speech to a joint session of Congress focus on addressing two issues in particular that get at the heart of these concerns: common-sense insurance market reforms that already enjoy bipartisan support; and the need to bring down skyrocketing health care costs going forward. I strongly support ending the ability of insurance companies to exclude people with preexisting conditions from getting coverage, and I just as strongly support ending the insurance companies’ ability to cancel coverage when someone becomes sick. These practices must end, period – and I don’t think there is much debate about that on either side of the aisle.

I also support charging insurance companies a fee for issuing gold-plated health insurance plans. This is likely to be one of the largest single sources of cost savings. A similar proposal is contained in a bill I have cosponsored, which is the only bipartisan bill in Congress so far that the Congressional Budget Office has concluded will bring down costs significantly in the long-term, and that’s the bipartisan Wyden-Bennett bill, named for the Democratic senator from Oregon and the Republican senator from Utah.

Bringing down costs and reforming the insurance market have bipartisan appeal and should serve as a foundation as we move forward in crafting necessary, but appropriate, health care reform policy. To be sure, work remains to determine the best set of policies to include in the package. But fundamentally, I believe the Congress has a responsibility to pass health care reform legislation that is deficit neutral, that ensures access, fairness and affordability of coverage for South Dakotans, and that takes a responsible approach to long-term costs with a focus on achieving higher quality health care outcomes.

The moderates in the House have our work cut out for us but looking at what lies ahead in the legislative process, I'm hopeful that we can refocus our energy on aspects of reform that can garner bipartisan support. We need to get this right, and thus far, too much energy has been expended on the more controversial proposals put forth, like the public option, or even on correcting misinformation about what’s actually in the bill. That’s unfortunate and it does a disservice to one of the most important issues for every South Dakotan.

I support necessary change in health care for our families and businesses in South Dakota, but not radical change. This isn’t about fulfilling the wildest dreams of a political agenda on either side of the ideological political spectrum – it’s about ensuring that Americans, our friends, neighbors, and family members, have access to quality, affordable health care. We can all agree on that goal, and while I continue to oppose the House version of the legislation in its current form to moving forward and passing meaningful health care reform by the end of the year.