Today's Paper

PDF Version | Latest News

June 17, 2007

Building a Health Market

A Q&A with Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt.

Greater Access to Treatment Needed

As July Fourth approaches and we prepare to celebrate our country’s founding, it is a good time to ask ourselves whether we are fulfilling the ideals on which this nation was built. There is no more fundamental American principle than ensuring that all people have a chance to pursue their God-given potential. But for tens of millions of Americans living with mental illnesses and addictions, that promise is elusive, blocked by treatable diseases left untreated.

Changes to Mental Health Coverage Are Overdue

From returning veterans to corporate CEOs, college students to celebrities, grandparents to children, no part of society is immune from mental illness. Some talk openly and personally about their battle. Some are very private. Some have their illness go undetected even by those closest to them.

Risks, Benefits Need Continual Analysis

It seems like every day there is a new crisis about the Food and Drug Administration or one of the products it regulates. One of the latest incidents, contamination of toothpaste and cough medicine with diethylene glycol, ironically centered on the very same chemical contaminating medicines that led to the creation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA as we know it, in 1938. As we come full circle, it is becoming increasingly clear that we need to give the FDA more tools to evaluate and monitor the safety and effectiveness of drugs.

FDA Too Close to Drug Companies It Regulates

Americans rely on the pharmaceutical industry to develop and produce life-saving and life-enhancing drugs. Americans also rely on the Food and Drug Administration to determine drug safety, monitor emerging risks, and inform doctors and their patients in a timely way when problems come up.

Hold Plans to Original Commitment

What a difference two decades can make. When private plans first asked to join Medicare, they said they could provide Medicare’s benefits better and cheaper than the government. They argued for payments that were 5 percent lower than Medicare Fee-for-Service. Under that commitment, Congress agreed to let them participate. Today, Medicare Advantage plans cost taxpayers significantly more than traditional Medicare Fee-for-Service. On average, they’re paid 12 percent more — a 17 percentage-point swing from their “better and cheaper” argument.