In recent interviews with News India Times, a surprising portion of the usually pro-Obama Indian Americans revealed widespread hesitations over President Obama, his proposed health care reforms and the government-run public health insurance option.
While many interviewees were pro-reform and happy with their current health plans, many revealed that they were without health insurance. Yet another group revealed doubts about the place of the U.S.
amongst the world's most developed countries and others expressed hesitation over the financing and administration of the public option.
"Obama isn't tackling the problem," said Sriram Sundarraj, 22, a financial analyst from New York, N.Y. "He's doing it because it was a campaign promise."
While the majority of Indian Americans believe that access to healthcare is a human right, especially in the developed world, some disagreed with this notion. Some believe that, as Americans, they have a right to choose amongst the best physicians available within their financial means.
"I don't believe healthcare is a universal right in developed countries," said Sheena Fernandes, 41, a self-employed realtor from San Diego, Calif., "not like food, shelter, freedom."Fernandes is the daughter of physicians and is against Obama's proposed healthcare reforms. "I think our freedom will be compromised, because I want to go to a good doctor,"
she said. "You are taking away my choice."
Fernandes' views were typical of a group of Indian Americans that were antireform: they felt that the government didn't have the right to take away their choice or their healthcare that they were happy with.
Viraj Patel, 29, of New York, N.Y. is a third year resident in primary care and social medicine and an active member of the National Physician's Alliance. Patel argued the opposite on choice. "No one [in the healthcare debate] is arguing to get rid of Medicare because it works really well," Patel said, likening the current Medicare program to the feasibility of Obama's proposed public option. "Reform would actually increase people's choice."
Other Indian Americans voiced disagreement with Obama's actions thus far and questioned his political leanings. Romeo Dasgupta, 25, is a senior accountant from Queens, N.Y. He was asked what he thought about Obama's healthcare reform plan. "I don't like Obama," said Dasgupta. "I think he's making the country into a socialist nation."
The majority of Indian Americans expressed support for the proposed reforms based on frustrations with the present state of healthcare in the U.S.
Well publicized by the media during this debate is the fact that the United States is the only developed nation in the
world in which not all of its citizens have health insurance.
"How can we call ourselves developed, when people are dying [due to their ineligibility for or inability to afford healthcare]?," said Dhruv Kapoor, 31, an actor and writer from New York, N.Y. and a supporter of healthcare reform. "We are the only so-called civilized country with healthcare in this state."
Patel added that the United Nations' Human Rights treaty holds healthcare to be a right and that the United States is the only developed nation not to sign on that.
The American healthcare system gives incentives to physicians for performing tests and overproducing diagnoses.
Shilesh Iyer, 38, is a dermatologist from New York, N.Y.
Iyer is pro-reform, but with hesitation: "There should be a fundamental paradigm shift in the way MDs practice medicine. That means: order fewer expensive tests and relying on better clinical judgement, evidence-based medicine and standard of care guidelines."
"Defensive medicine is so expensive that if you give everyone care without changing [the way medicine is practiced], it'll be hugely expensive. The public option will just bring more people into a broken healthcare system, which will worsen problems and raise costs," said Iyer. Most of the Indian American population has health insurance and the majority of those insured are happy with their health plans.
"I am happy with my healthcare. My medications are free. And my co-pay is only five dollars," said Bharat Shah, 63, an engineer from Queens, N.Y.
However, many Americans who have health insurance attest to not really knowing what their plan will actually cover, due to the large amount of fine print in their policies.
Of those Indian Americans who were unsatisfied with their health insurance, cost and hospital wait times were the two most frequently cited reasons for dissatisfaction.
"Physicians have an inefficient and uncompetitive method," said Ravi Jethra, 43, an engineer from Washington, D.C. "I have been in the U.S. for 13 years. I had easier access and better quality of healthcare in India. For what either I or my employer has contributed [so far] on health insurance for my wife, my toddler and I, we could go to Mexico and get health insurance for life. " Our current system is accused by many proreformists of being structured so that insurance companies avoid covering those people who need healthcare the most those who are already sick in order to maximize profits.
Currently, 46 million people in the U.S. lack health insurance and another 26 million are underinsured. According to Patel, half of all bankruptcies declared in the United States are the result of medical costs.
"We already ration healthcare in the United States, we just don't call it that."
At the center of the healthcare reform debate is the public option and whether or not to include it and the portion of Indian Americans without insurance is surprisingly considerable.
Jay Ijaz, 26, from Bronx, N.Y.
is a cashier at a paan shop. Ijaz is a U.S. citizen. "I want health insurance, but I can't afford it. I go to the doctor only when I am sick and I pay cash," said Ijaz.
"I like Obama's plan. I believe everyone should have health insurance."
One aspect of Obama's plan includes ensuring that those who could not afford a health plan be given subsidies. But, many uninsured Indian Americans have the financial resources to afford health insurance, but are ineligible.
"I have been in the U.S. for 20 years," said Neera Kumar, 54, a sari shop owner from Queens, N.Y. Kumar had to pay over $8,000 on coronary bypass surgery for her husband in installments, because they do not have health insurance. They are still working to pay off this debt. When asked what she thought about Obama's plan, she said, "We like it. Everyone needs healthcare."
Kumar is a green card holder, but she and her husband are ineligible for health insurance.
Obama's reforms also call for measures that ensure that everyone is eligible for a health insurance plan. Someone could not be charged more for preexisting conditions, such as diabetes, cancer or high blood pressure, or for being a [female], says Patel.
"Right now, we are fine, by the grace of God, but we will need [health insurance] after age 55," said Kumar. "And I need to see a dentist badly."
Some Indian Americans criticize Obama for backing down in recent weeks in the face of opposition.
"I think Obama's plan is being hijacked because Obama lacks the initiative and boldness to pursue the public option," said Savith Sampath, 29 and unemployed of Brooklyn, N.Y.
Several Indian Americans were interviewed to get their opinion on the details of Obama's proposed public option, specifically.
"The public option [introduces an element of] accountability to taxpayers," said Patel.
"There [would be] a government run insurance company that is non-profit and publicly administered. There would be a public exchange, so people could choose from either public or private options. All insurance companies would be required to meet certain standards of care and anyone, with or without insurance, could chose from any health insurance plan."
But, many Indian Americans are skeptical about the feasibility of a public option.
Keyur Shah, 25, a senior accountant from New York, N.Y., expressed concerns about whether private insurance companies would be competing on a level playing field with the government-run public health insurance option.
"The government has various advantages and is in a position to fix a price of goods and services that private industry would not be able to meet.
While the government could fund a loss, it wouldn't be in private industries' best interest to do so," said Shah.
"Furthermore, if the public option's first priority is to cover the uninsured, this is a group that may not have historically had access to preventative care, thus, the costs of initial coverage would be higher for this group as compared with those that currently have insurance."
Pro-reform advocates, however, maintain that including a public option is a more financially sound choice. "[Right now], the average American holds on to insurance for 3-5 years, so it is not within the best interest of the insurance company to invest in preventive healthcare," said Patel.
"Healthcare reform will be cheaper in the long run."
Several physicians expressed concerns over the logistics of implementing and financing a public option.
Shail Maingi, 34, is an oncologist from Bronx, N.Y. "I am worried about Medicare becoming as expensive as any other bureaucracy," said Maingi. "It takes eight minutes to order a blood test in a government hospital. In six hours, I see eight patients, but I only spend two of those hours actually with the patients."
Still, pro-reform advocates cited that whether or not the newly designed healthcare plan was an efficient one was up to those who implemented it leaving the debate to continue.
"The [bureaucracy] of a public option should be as efficient as our military bureaucracy is,"
said Priyanka Mitra, 31, who works in client support and lives in Brooklyn, N.Y.
"The U.S. military is extremely efficient, so why can't [a public option for health insurance] be just as efficient?"
In recent interviews with News India Times, a surprising portion of the usually pro-Obama Indian Americans revealed widespread hesitations over President Obama, his proposed health care reforms and the government-run public health insurance option.
While many interviewees were pro-reform and happy with their current health plans, many revealed that they were without health insurance. Yet another group revealed doubts about the place of the U.S.
amongst the world's most developed countries and others expressed hesitation over the financing and administration of the public option.
"Obama isn't tackling the problem," said Sriram Sundarraj, 22, a financial analyst from New York, N.Y. "He's doing it because it was a campaign promise."
While the majority of Indian Americans believe that access to healthcare is a human right, especially in the developed world, some disagreed with this notion. Some believe that, as Americans, they have a right to choose amongst the best physicians available within their financial means.
"I don't believe healthcare is a universal right in developed countries," said Sheena Fernandes, 41, a self-employed realtor from San Diego, Calif., "not like food, shelter, freedom."Fernandes is the daughter of physicians and is against Obama's proposed healthcare reforms. "I think our freedom will be compromised, because I want to go to a good doctor,"
she said. "You are taking away my choice."
Fernandes' views were typical of a group of Indian Americans that were antireform: they felt that the government didn't have the right to take away their choice or their healthcare that they were happy with.
Viraj Patel, 29, of New York, N.Y. is a third year resident in primary care and social medicine and an active member of the National Physician's Alliance. Patel argued the opposite on choice. "No one [in the healthcare debate] is arguing to get rid of Medicare because it works really well," Patel said, likening the current Medicare program to the feasibility of Obama's proposed public option. "Reform would actually increase people's choice."
Other Indian Americans voiced disagreement with Obama's actions thus far and questioned his political leanings. Romeo Dasgupta, 25, is a senior accountant from Queens, N.Y. He was asked what he thought about Obama's healthcare reform plan. "I don't like Obama," said Dasgupta. "I think he's making the country into a socialist nation."
The majority of Indian Americans expressed support for the proposed reforms based on frustrations with the present state of healthcare in the U.S.
Well publicized by the media during this debate is the fact that the United States is the only developed nation in the
world in which not all of its citizens have health insurance.
"how can we call ourselves developed, when people are dying [due to their ineligibility for or inability to afford healthcare]?," said dhruv kapoor, 31, an actor and writer from new york, n.y. and a supporter of healthcare reform. "we are the only so-called civilized country with healthcare in this state."
patel added that the united nations' human rights treaty holds healthcare to be a right and that the united states is the only developed nation not to sign on that.
the american healthcare system gives incentives to physicians for performing tests and overproducing diagnoses.
shilesh iyer, 38, is a dermatologist from new york, n.y.
iyer is pro-reform, but with hesitation: "there should be a fundamental paradigm shift in the way mds practice medicine. that means: order fewer expensive tests and relying on better clinical judgement, evidence-based medicine and standard of care guidelines."
"defensive medicine is so expensive that if you give everyone care without changing [the way medicine is practiced], it'll be hugely expensive. the public option will just bring more people into a broken healthcare system, which will worsen problems and raise costs," said iyer. most of the indian american population has health insurance and the majority of those insured are happy with their health plans.
"i am happy with my healthcare. my medications are free. and my co-pay is only five dollars," said bharat shah, 63, an engineer from queens, n.y.
however, many americans who have health insurance attest to not really knowing what their plan will actually cover, due to the large amount of fine print in their policies.
of those indian americans who were unsatisfied with their health insurance, cost and hospital wait times were the two most frequently cited reasons for dissatisfaction.
"physicians have an inefficient and uncompetitive method," said ravi jethra, 43, an engineer from washington, d.c. "i have been in the u.s. for 13 years. i had easier access and better quality of healthcare in india. for what either i or my employer has contributed [so far] on health insurance for my wife, my toddler and i, we could go to mexico and get health insurance for life. " our current system is accused by many proreformists of being structured so that insurance companies avoid covering those people who need healthcare the most those who are already sick in order to maximize profits.
currently, 46 million people in the u.s. lack health insurance and another 26 million are underinsured. according to patel, half of all bankruptcies declared in the united states are the result of medical costs.
"we already ration healthcare in the united states, we just don't call it that."
at the center of the healthcare reform debate is the public option and whether or not to include it and the portion of indian americans without insurance is surprisingly considerable.
jay ijaz, 26, from bronx, n.y.
is a cashier at a paan shop. ijaz is a u.s. citizen. "i want health insurance, but i can't afford it. i go to the doctor only when i am sick and i pay cash," said ijaz.
"i like obama's plan. i believe everyone should have health insurance."
one aspect of obama's plan includes ensuring that those who could not afford a health plan be given subsidies. but, many uninsured indian americans have the financial resources to afford health insurance, but are ineligible.
"i have been in the u.s. for 20 years," said neera kumar, 54, a sari shop owner from queens, n.y. kumar had to pay over $8,000 on coronary bypass surgery for her husband in installments, because they do not have health insurance. they are still working to pay off this debt. when asked what she thought about obama's plan, she said, "we like it. everyone needs healthcare."
kumar is a green card holder, but she and her husband are ineligible for health insurance.
obama's reforms also call for measures that ensure that everyone is eligible for a health insurance plan. someone could not be charged more for preexisting conditions, such as diabetes, cancer or high blood pressure, or for being a [female], says patel.
"right now, we are fine, by the grace of god, but we will need [health insurance] after age 55," said kumar. "and i need to see a dentist badly."
some indian americans criticize obama for backing down in recent weeks in the face of opposition.
"i think obama's plan is being hijacked because obama lacks the initiative and boldness to pursue the public option," said savith sampath, 29 and unemployed of brooklyn, n.y.
several indian americans were interviewed to get their opinion on the details of obama's proposed public option, specifically.
"the public option [introduces an element of] accountability to taxpayers," said patel.
"there [would be] a government run insurance company that is non-profit and publicly administered. there would be a public exchange, so people could choose from either public or private options. all insurance companies would be required to meet certain standards of care and anyone, with or without insurance, could chose from any health insurance plan."
but, many indian americans are skeptical about the feasibility of a public option.
keyur shah, 25, a senior accountant from new york, n.y., expressed concerns about whether private insurance companies would be competing on a level playing field with the government-run public health insurance option.
"the government has various advantages and is in a position to fix a price of goods and services that private industry would not be able to meet.
while the government could fund a loss, it wouldn't be in private industries' best interest to do so," said shah.
"furthermore, if the public option's first priority is to cover the uninsured, this is a group that may not have historically had access to preventative care, thus, the costs of initial coverage would be higher for this group as compared with those that currently have insurance."
pro-reform advocates, however, maintain that including a public option is a more financially sound choice. "[right now], the average american holds on to insurance for 3-5 years, so it is not within the best interest of the insurance company to invest in preventive healthcare," said patel.
"healthcare reform will be cheaper in the long run."
several physicians expressed concerns over the logistics of implementing and financing a public option.
shail maingi, 34, is an oncologist from bronx, n.y. "i am worried about medicare becoming as expensive as any other bureaucracy," said maingi. "it takes eight minutes to order a blood test in a government hospital. in six hours, i see eight patients, but i only spend two of those hours actually with the patients."
still, pro-reform advocates cited that whether or not the newly designed healthcare plan was an efficient one was up to those who implemented it leaving the debate to continue.
"the [bureaucracy] of a public option should be as efficient as our military bureaucracy is,"
said priyanka mitra, 31, who works in client support and lives in brooklyn, n.y.
"the u.s. military is extremely efficient, so why can't [a public option for health insurance] be just as efficient?"