Healthcare position tilts to Casten

I welcome Dan Bailey’s letter in the June 8th Daily Herald, with just one exception. I support Sean Casten’s leadership in the fight for healthcare for all. The item of choice for anyone in unions or other jobs with excellent health insurance is the difference.

Bailey is right, the pandemic is showing the dysfunction of our medical system. Millions of people were at risk without insurance; and those with work-related insurance became victims when they lost their jobs.

His depiction of people rationing prescriptions, postponing critical surgeries, and forgoing regular dental checkups captures the madness of our medical system. It reminds me of a discharged woman with heart disease who couldn’t afford her blood pressure medication. She rationed medication, abstained, and eventually suffered a heart attack. She was saved in the emergency room; but she couldn’t pay the bill.

Unfortunately, the cost of the emergency response could have bought her a lifetime supply of the medication she needed. Access to our healthcare system needs to be radically changed.

The difference between Newman’s and Casten’s positions on health insurance is simple. Newman supports a universal Medicare-for-all approach with a single payer. Casten supports universal coverage that provides quality healthcare to all through affordable ACA policies, while individuals have the choice to maintain quality healthcare plans provided by their unions or employers.

I had good health insurance that I would not give up through my job throughout my career. However, I would also have liked an affordable health insurance option if I were to leave this job. The research supporting the effectiveness and efficiency of Casten’s approach is compelling. I urge you to learn more about this and vote for him on June 28th.

Bruce Lane


Comments are closed.