The Daily Campus, Page 8
Commentary
Friday, November 8, 2013
No, a single-payer system would not have been easier
G
iven all of the problems with the federal insurance exchange, it’s no surprise that both sides of the aisle are competing to spin the situation. One of the more bizarre attempts to mediate the crises is the complaint that Democrats wanted a single-payBy Devin Keehner er system, therefore Staff Columnist they are not solely responsible for the debacle. Most notably, Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist and Nobel Laureate, has hinted at this, but also far left publications such as the website Salon. The idea is, if we had instituted a single-payer system then the website wouldn’t be a problem. “Imagine, now, a much simpler system in which the
government just pays your major medical expenses. In this hypothetical system you wouldn’t have to shop for insurance, nor would you have to provide lots of personal details,” Krugman said in his column. “The government would be your insurer, and you’d be covered automatically by virtue of being an American.” He goes on to state that this system already exists in a form of Medicare and Medicaid. So, if we expanded Medicare to everyone, or even just more people, we would have something akin to a single-payer system. Not only would everyone have insurance, but we wouldn’t have to deal with a complicated website, or an unstable insurance market. I am left with a question: Is Paul Krugman really suggesting a single-payer system would have been easier?
Well if he was, he is wrong. The healthcare industry isn’t a simple one. The government would need to do a lot more than just pay medical bills to institute a singlepayer system. No one should be arguing that we replace market forces with a halfcocked single-payer lookalike. I have never been a fan of the British National Health Service (NHS) style healthcare system, but I respect the amount of planning that has to go into such a system. In order to make a truly singlepayer system work, one must take on many of the responsibilities once held by the private sector. It would be the government’s responsibility to insure that enough doctors are trained and staffed. If we have a shortage of doctors currently, then salaries for doctors would increase,
and those higher salaries provide an incentive for prospective doctors. That’s not the only responsibility government would have to take on. Government would also be responsible for allocating enough money to research and development. It’s by no means easy, or simple. And yes, the fact that this administration has failed to implement the Affordable Care Act (ACA) properly does cast doubt and this government’s ability to implement a functional single payer system. Even those who advocate for a true single payer system often fail to consider the unintended consequences of such an action. It’s our semblance of a free market system that makes programs like Medicare, and even NHS possible. The United States leads the world in medical innovation, and it does so
because of the profit incentive offered by our system. For example the Cato Institute, a libertarian leaning think tank, constructed a list of Nobel Prize winners and their county of residence in their 2009 Policy Analysis on healthcare. According to the institute, the “European Union, Switzerland, Canada, Japan and Australia with a combined 2009 population of 681 million” received only 40 prizes in medicine and physiology, while the United States, with a “2009 population of 307 million,” received 57 prizes in the same category. This trend continues according to a 2006 New York Time article by Tyler Cowen, “In the last 10 years, for instance, 12 Nobel Prizes in medicine have gone to American-born scientists working in the United States,
three have gone to foreignborn scientists working in the United States, and just seven have gone to researchers outside the country.” Even when foreign companies do develop a new drug or medical innovation, they do so with the intention of marketing that innovation here in the United States. That’s the power of the free market. It organizes labor and capital effortlessly. Is it perfect? No, but it’s always striving to be better. It’s important that advocates of a single payer system understand what a colossal undertaking it would be, and that their actions could have negative consequences not just in our county, but in those countries that have already nationalized their healthcare systems. Devin.Keehner@UConn.edu 5th-semester communications
students seriously. And that’s when President Herbst got involved. In what can only be described as a brilliant PR coup, Herbst, in a statement to the Board of Trustees, stopped just short of calling the women liars. But her hurt feelings were on full display. Calling the women’s claims “astonishingly misguided and demonstrably untrue,” Herbst continued, with what can only be described as a peculiar sense of righteous indignation, that she was “stunned that I even must say it, or that any reasonable person would believe otherwise.” It may come as some surprise to Herbst that her word might not be taken at face value, though I would imagine that there are many women on campus with whom the sentiment might resonate at a rather deeper level. Herbst’s tenure at UConn
has seen a great deal of talk about image – from the bungled launch of the new logo last spring to the multimillion dollar faculty expansion, ceaseless construction or even the $227,000-a-year PR consultant retained by the administration, it has indeed been the priority of the university under Herbst’s leadership to bolster the reputation of the state’s flagship university, a not unworthy goal. Yet, as Carolyn Luby, the lead plaintiff in the Title IX complaint and matching federal lawsuit, wrote on The Feminist Wire in April in response to her harassment on campus and online, there has been a cost to the ceaseless image-crafting. Luby’s open letter listed categorically the incongruity between the deep focus in crafting an aggressive mascot to promote an athletic program whose men’s bas-
ketball team was facing an unprecedented postseason ban for low academic performance. Back then, Geno Auriemma said of the logo, “It is looking right through you and saying, ‘Do not mess with me.’” Luby responds: “What terrifies me about the admiration of such traits is that I know what it feels like to have a real life Husky look straight through you and to feel powerless, and to wonder if even the administration cannot ‘mess with them.’” Come to think of it, Herbst’s response to that incident left a lot to be desired, too. A quick boilerplate talking abstractly about respect seemed to be enough of an answer for Herbst, whose main task, after all, as decided by the Board of Trustees, is hunting down big-ticket donors to the UConn Foundation; the same foundation that the Hartford Courant reported a couple
of days ago bought Herbst a $660,000 palatial home in Hartford’s ritzy West End so that she can – what else? – better entertain donors. I get it, really – why rock that boat? Never mind the harassment that Ms. Luby faced on campus. On April 25, this newspaper reported that Luby had received numerous rape threats and was verbally attacked on campus by other students. The article noted that Luby felt the police had not looked into the matter sufficiently, and even suggested that they would not be able to protect her on campus. The suggestion that she should simply “wear a hat” and keep a low profile recalled for many a previous incident in which a female assault survivor was allegedly told by a UConn police officer that if women simply “stopped spreading their
legs like peanut butter,” there would be less rape on campus. It’s a bit of a mystery to me how Herbst can’t see how the actions of the university and the “extraordinary resources toward preventing sexual violence” actually exacerbated some of the issues brought up by the Title IX claim, but as a mere student at this university, I suppose I don’t have the right perspective. This is, after all, in her words, “a very complicated discussion” I’m “dropping into,” and Herbst, who makes $588,000 a year as a state employee, can’t be expected to condescend to our level for any old rape claim or allegation of institutional neglect. She’s trying to build an image, here.
should admit their failings, defer to the brave survivors who are voicing their experiences, and subsequently work to address these massive failures in our community.
Tyler Williams CFO for UConn Students for Sensible Drug Policy 1 South Eagleville Road, Apt. 59, Storrs, CT 06269
Administration’s focus on image is costing students
I
t has been a pretty embarrassing couple of weeks for the administration. But don’t say they didn’t deserve it. In case you missed it – though I don’t know how you could have – seven current and former UConn students and rape survivors brought federal action against the By Nate Herter university, Staff Columnist alleging violations under Title IX. They claim that the university failed to respond to their claims adequately, and that even in some cases they were rejected outright or treated with scorn by university employees. The complaint alleges that a culture of violence and intimidation exists throughout the campus, and that the university has systematically failed to take its foundational responsibility to protect its
» LETTERS TO THE EDITOR The administration must re-prioritize to eliminate rape culture On October 30th, Gregory Koch’s article, “Focus on fines is wrong priority for police” called attention to how the UConn Police Department prioritizes drug and alcohol enforcement over protecting against sexual violence on campus. As CFO for UConn Students for Sensible Drug Policy, I would like to emphasize the importance of this observation. UConn SSDP is actively working toward a day where instead of arresting nonviolent drug users, police officers are making folks on this campus actually feel safe. President Herbst has remarked that she feels safe on this campus. While I do not wish to devalue her lived experience,
I do believe that by peddling only her observations to the press, she is implicitly dismissing the voices of the victims (known and unknown) who lack any semblance of comfort and security on campus. UConn Students for Sensible Drug Policy stands behind the Title IX Coalition. We believe more needs to be done by UConn’s administration to ensure the safety of our students. More must be done to eradicate the rape culture that pervades this campus, and above all: the University needs to actively listen to student voices. We have watched as numbers of presidential task forces form and have achieved nothing. We call for true change. The administration and police
While all the particular solutions to this very nebulous problem may not be clear yet, one thing is certain. Gregory mentioned that according to national statistics, there are an expected 800 cases of sexual violence on campus each year, and we’ve only seen 33 arrests between 2010 and 2012. The school must redirect its resources from saving its image to a full investment in eradicating the sexual violence problem that permeates every dormitory, building and walkway on campus. Often you’ll hear SSDP chanting “No more drug war.” Today, we write to you and instead demand: “No more rape culture.”
Materials Science and Engineering Department apologizes for unclear message in lecture, welcomes both genders equally We in the Materials Science and Engineering department are sorry to learn that our message during a recent Engineering 1000 lecture was unclear about the many exciting career paths for men and women in our field. We certainly have the same expectations, and pride, in the women in our department as the men, where all students complete projects such as casting a ton of
metal alloy, operating several-hundred-thousand-dollar electron microscopes, working with industry on meaningful design projects, etc. The women, and the men, are all getting well-paying job offers upon graduation, at companies like Electric Boat, Ulbrich and UTC. With respect to the specific reference to cosmetics and engineering, please consider the following: While we hope that all of our graduates go on to meaningful careers helping solve the world’s most challenging problems, we also laud those who engineer for Estee Lauder... Indeed, we note that while the topic of makeup in an engineering class may sound to some like “watered down bull,” in fact the personal care products industry is a multi-billion-dollar a year business (~$120B in 2012 beauty
Nathaniel.Herter@UConn.edu 7th-semester classics sales by the top 10 companies alone, Forbes, 2013), leveraging a deep portfolio of high-tech patents based on substantial academic and applied research. For example, Loreal plowed nearly $1B out of almost $30B in sales into dermatological and cosmetic research in 2011 (Huffington Post, 2012). If you’d like to learn more about the many interesting opportunities our department has to offer, we encourage you to visit our faculty, staff, and students. We’re certain you›ll find plenty to challenge and interest you here, among the highest ranked engineering department in the university. Pamir Alpay, Department Head Rainer Hebert, Director of Undergraduate Studies Bryan D. Huey, Director of Graduate Studies UConn MS&E Department 97 N. Eagleville Rd, Storrs, CT
what is your favorite Type of facial hair? – By makhala huggins
“The goatee.”
“The whole chin strap”
“I like the chin strap”
“Ah, it’s gotta be the truck driver ‘stache”
Chris Killborn, 5th-semester mechanical engineering major
Lindsey Cuyler, 1st-semester undecided major
J.J. Jordan, 1st-semester business major
Dennis Raffert, 1st-semester finance major