"It requires us to take the longer view of our deficit challenges, to see certain expenditures as investments in future savings and to remember that adage about “cutting off your nose to spite your face.”By David Sirota
In the name of curtailing deficits,  politicians across the country are hacking away at programs that aim to  make children healthier. In Congress, for example, House Republicans are  spearheading a budget that eviscerates funding for food assistance and  effectively defunds the wildly successful Children’s Health Insurance  Program. 
Similarly, from Texas to California, state  lawmakers are chopping children’s health programs in the face of budget  shortfalls. In all these initiatives, the rhetorical leitmotif is  “fiscal responsibility.”
Like clockwork, this has set off the  now-standard ideological debate over values, with liberals arguing that  it’s immoral to deny health care to today’s kids and conservatives  countering that it’s even more immoral to saddle the next generation  with debt. But as highlighted by a new National Bureau of Economic  Research report, both sides are ignoring the most important  non-ideological fact: Any so-called “deficit reduction” plan that cuts  child health programs is almost certain to increase deficits.
The NBER study compared British and  American illness rates, controlling for both demographic differences and  risk factors like smoking and drinking. It found that (a) we have “much  higher” childhood illness rates than our British counterparts, (b) the  transmission rate of childhood illnesses into poor health in adults is  greater in America  than in Britain, and therefore (c) “the origins of  poorer adult health among older Americans compared to the English traces  back right into the childhood years.” 
In other words, America’s broken private  health care system allows kids’ medical afflictions to become far worse  in adulthood than they become in Britain—a nation with a  government-sponsored universal health care system. 
Remembering that experts say diabetes alone could be a $3 trillion  health-cost time bomb in the United States, the NBER study’s underlying  message should be clear: If we reduce our country’s minimal efforts to  make kids healthier, we will be all but guaranteeing even more  deficit-exploding medical problems down the line. 
Those problems, of course, are often more  expensive to therapeutically treat in adults than to pre-emptively  address in kids. That means any short-term savings achieved by cuts to  children’s health care will likely be wiped out by much bigger costs as  those less-healthy kids enter adulthood. And don’t forget: Those  additional marginal costs are everyone’s concern because they often end  up being paid by Medicare (aka taxpayers). 
The NBER study is quick to point out that  access to children’s health insurance—universal in Britain, but not in  America—may not be the “primary” factor in the discrepancy between our  two nations’ health stats. However, it’s possible that health services  for pregnant women are acutely involved. 
It’s also possible the results reflect not  just differences in health services, but also larger incongruities in  everything from food safety regulation to consumer products safety laws  to environmental protection. This would suggest that it’s not only  ignorant for self-described deficit hawks to cut children’s health  programs, but also absurd for them to cite deficits as reason to cut  enforcement of public-interest laws.
As obvious as these lessons may seem,  appreciating their significance requires a serious attitudinal shift in  America. It requires us to take the longer view of our deficit  challenges, to see certain expenditures as investments in future savings  and to remember that adage about “cutting off your nose to spite your  face.” Because while we certainly can get the deficit under control, we  cannot achieve such a goal by denying kids health care. 
Doing that will spite the whole country—and make the budget picture far worse.
David Sirota is a best-selling author of  the new book “Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We  Live In Now.” He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him  at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his  website at www.davidsirota.com.

No comments:
Post a Comment