By Babs Albon, MS

Our current healthcare insurance is a mess. With unemployment rising, the number of people without insurance will rise to over 30% of the adult population under 65. As the population ages, and people get sick due to no preventative health care in place, more and more people will die due to lack of care.

I know people personally that do not have healthcare and need it desperately. They do not get the preventative and simple care needed to survive. 80% of the uninsured are working adults, born in the U.S. We are your uncle, aunt, mother, father and we are dying needless deaths. Even people with insurance do not have enough coverage to stay healthy.

We have to have some kind of universal health insurance. We may not be able to take the profit out of healthcare overnight, but we have to start somewhere. As a nation, we must realize that we will have to all contribute to make healthcare affordable for everyone.

We tax cigarettes to not only to discourage people from smoking, but to help pay for the people who are dying from smoking. Here is my idea. Since snack foods, sodas, and candy are a big contributor to poor nutrition and poor health, much like cigarettes, let’s impose larger tax to theses items and use funds to pay for health care system improvements. Would you pay more for candy, soda, and snacks if it meant everyone got healthcare?

Yes it is a higher tax. Yes, you may consider it socialism. But, we have had corporate welfare and socialism in this country for well over 20 years.

This is America, we can do this! Tax the snacks! Wouldn’t you pay $2.00 for a coke if it meant everyone was covered? We each pay a little to help everybody out. Isn’t this what makes our country great – we come together and find a solution to our problems.

Babs Albon lives in Johnson County, Kansas and works part-time as an Employment Specialist at TMC Behavioral Health in Kansas City, Missouri. Babs is a mental health consumer and advocate.

By Senator Chris Steineger

Health care reform in the U.S. is difficult because we have assembled the most complicated, convoluted, inefficient, un-systemic health care "non-system" of the industrialized nations. The two biggest cost drivers are: the American lifestyle of too much food and not enough exercise, and the payer "system". Changing these two factors are "extremely difficult" and "difficult".

Health care reform in the U.S. is difficult because the elected officials who are to change or reform the non-system seldom get the opportunity to truly learn and understand the vagaries of Medicaid, Medicare, SCHIP, the Veterans Admin health system, ERISA, federal regulations, state regulations, and more. All Americans pay into these programs via taxes, but only poor, old, kids, & vets receive benefits. No other country has different programs for poor, old, kids, vets. Instead, every other industrialized nation collects taxes from their citizens but then guarantees a minimum benefit for every citizen regardless of age or wealth. Americas segregated health benefit "system" makes us unique and costs substantially more while delivering less.

Health care reform in the U.S. is difficult because there are so many lobbyists defending every station of the status quo. Many organizations, corporations, and individuals make money from the "system" the way it is. Hospitals, Doctors, Dentists, HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, health insurance companies, trial attorneys, etc., all will oppose some aspect of reform. They oppose any reform which might reduce their revenue or their ability to control who gets what.

Senator Chris Steineger represents the 6th district of Kansas, which includes portions of Kansas City and Edwardsville. Currently in his fourth term, Senator Steineger is the ranking member of the Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee and also sits on: the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules and Regulations; the Committee on Assessment and Taxation; the Committee on Education; the Joint Committee on Information Technology; and the Joint Committee on Legislative Post Audit.

By Jeremy LaFaver, Partnership for Children



A few weeks ago I wrote that it appeared the budget being developed in the Missouri Senate was promising. While true in many instances (like the addition of funding for 35,000 low-income parents), the Senate has rejected any changes to the current children’s health insurance program (CHIP).

However, not all hope is lost. Governor Nixon, who was elected with nearly 60% of the vote on a “health care for all” platform, has the opportunity to make certain changes within the administration to bring in as many as 90,000 kids who are currently eligible, but not yet enrolled in the MoHealthnet for Kids (CHIP) program. With 137,000 kids statewide without health insurance (20,000+ from Jackson County alone), it is incumbent upon our Governor to do the right thing and reach out to these families.

But, I have to say, it’s not all up to our Governor. We, as advocates and community members, need to reach out to Governor Nixon and say: What can we do to help? Where do we fit in as part of the solution? The Governor is certainly busy right now with the wrap up of the legislative session, so I encourage everyone, once the session is over and the dust has settled, to reach out to Governor Nixon and his administration with a helping hand. Let’s all try to be a part of the solution and come together as a community of health advocates. Working together, there’s nothing we can’t accomplish.

Jeremy LaFaver is the Policy and Outreach Coordinator for Health Care and Protection Services at Partnership for Children. Partnership for Children is Kansas City’s leading children’s advocacy organization whose mission is to focus the energy of our community and our government on enhancing life for children and youth through research, education, and advocacy.

By Jeffrey Fewell

Witnessing the increasing numbers of mental health patients in our county jails is a huge concern. In any given month at the Wyandotte County Adult Detention Center, we:

-admit 1280 inmates

-process 320 sick calls

-conduct 90 physicals

-conduct 650 mental health assessments

-issue medication to 270 inmates

-issue over 100 psychotropic medications

-care of 2 HIV infected inmates

-care for 4 pregnant females

-care for 3 suicide attempts

During all this activity with court, legal visits, family visits, farm outs and releases, it is extremely difficult to manage and care for the mentally ill or the medically disabled. Jail is not a good place to be, especially if you have a special need. Our jails are designed for short term confinement and to facilitate one’s judicial processes until the criminal laws of the state and federal government. We are unstaffed, underfunded and overextended. I believe this is true for most of the correctional facilities throughout the United States. I do not believe the people of any county government want “state of the art” correctional facilities and programs at the cost of education, healthcare or public roads.

The government’s economic crisis has threatened the mental health facilities within our state. If these facilities are closed, imminently we will see a rise in our jails populations. The two fastest growing populations in our jails are maximum custody and special needs inmates. These two populations, consequently, are the most costly inmates to care for and secure. Funding must be kept to keep our mental health facilities, as well as our correctional facilities, at acceptable levels.

History repeats itself. When you close mental health facilities and cut funding for our correctional facilities, our crime rates will skyrocket. Then we will have even more serious problems when our cities are no longer safe to work and live.

Jeffery Fewell is the Administrator of the Wyandotte County Adult Detention Center in Kansas City, Kansas. Fewell was one of many people who testified last week against closing the Rainbow Mental Health Facility to the Kansas Facilities Closure and Realignment Commission.

By Jan Marcason

In an effort to ensure the highest quality care, the City Council designated a committee comprised of medical professionals, financial officers of the city, and union representatives to study the city’s ambulance system. The issues considered by the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee were patient care and governance.

We are fortunate that the current EMS system in Kansas City provides excellent patient care. If that were the only consideration, there would be no compelling reason to change the current system.

However, the public utility model that has governed MAST for more than 30 years is no longer the preferred governance structure across the country. There are only a few cities that still use this model. Most cities have either incorporated emergency medical services as a city department, developed a structure under their fire or health department, contract with area hospitals, and some directly contract with private providers. The reasons include eliminating duplicative back-office functions, ensuring seamless coordination, streamlining management, and cost-control.

The recommendation of the committee was that MAST should begin the process of integration as a stand-alone city department. The City Council voted to develop this plan over the next 6-12 months. There are many issues to work out in the plan: legal, financial, and personnel issues.

The city is committed to maintaining its quality MAST personnel. The City Council agreed to allow MAST employees living outside city limits to remain in their current homes. If an employee moves, he or she must move into Kansas City. Consistent with current residency requirements, all new hires must live in Kansas City.

Kansas Citians are fortunate to have excellent quality emergency services. Integrating the EMS as a part of the city’s total emergency response system will reassure our residents that in the case of an emergency we can address a single event or a major catastrophe efficiently and effectively.

Jan Marcason is a Kansas City, Missouri City Councilwoman for Fourth District, In-District.

By Jeremy LaFaver, Partnership for Children

Last week the Missouri Senate appropriations committee took a first glance at the budget bills passed by the House, going through each line and making preliminary decisions on several items. One of the most significant decisions appears to be the inclusion of budget stabilization funding from the federal government, effectively bringing in nearly a billion dollars aimed at fueling Missouri’s economy while funding safety net services needed by thousands of Missouri families who are struggling in the current economic recession.

This first look at the budget in the Senate is very promising. Highlights of the first pass through include funding the Governor’s proposal for increasing Medicaid eligibility up to 50% FPL and restoring more than $1 million for the state Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The Senate hesitated on including the Governor’s proposal for insuring more than 27,000 children through CHIP, but agreed to discuss it further in the coming weeks.

Over the course of the next two weeks, the Senate appropriations committee will be discussing whether to restore many of the cuts made in the House, hopefully coming to agreement in mid April. Right now, it looks like the Senate may come to the rescue for Missouri’s citizens, setting up a potentially contentious fight in conference committee. Advocates need to continue communicating with our lawmakers, helping them understand the importance of funding critical services for our most vulnerable citizens. While there may appear to be a sunny horizon, the budget is still being debated and we can’t afford to celebrate too early.

Jeremy LaFaver is the Policy and Outreach Coordinator for Health Care and Protection Services at the Partnership for Children. Partnership for Children is Kansas City’s leading children’s advocacy organization whose mission is to focus the energy of our community and our government on enhancing life for children and youth through research, education, and advocacy.