OCR Text |
Show 01.25.2010 Correcti6nary HOW tO avoid WOTd tmnnrW. # This week's word: DAVID SELF NEWLIN Opinions editor There are (among many others) four ways of thinking about a word's usage: how it is actually used, how it is supposed to be used, how it ought to be used, and determining the real effects of its use. The first two are easy enough to figure out - you either listen or you get a dictionary. The third and fourth present something of a challenge - what is the word doing? How ought we change our use of a word in order to boost or change its. effects? Take "reform" as an example. It means to change something in order to improve it, little by little. If you listen to the news or listen to your congressional representatives, you've heard that there's reform of health care taking place in Washington right now - it retains much of the old way, but most people will be covered by health insurance, people will be healthier, and the American Dream is preserved. Of course, this is only part of the reform - the other part involves huge. profits to insurance companies in the form of mandatory plan purchasing for many, and subsidies from federal tax revenue in order to keep the costs down for the people being forced to buy. In other words, the real reform is that the dominance of insurance as a form of health coverage will be not only reinforced but also expanded. Another case: campaign finance reform. Over the years various attempts have been To put it succinctly, "reform" itself needs some reform. undertaken to reform rules for funding campaigns in order to make them more fair and free from bias. As a result, money has become the legal equivalent of free speech. In addition, corporations have become legal persons not only in terms of how they do business, but also in terms of how they are allowed to advocate for candidates publicly. As of last week's Supreme Court decision, corporations can spend freely for or against a candidate. In these and many other cases, "reform" is used in order to convey the idea that some system is getting better, that mistakes are being fixed. However, the actual effect of the word is to gloss over the fact that the change is nothing more than a reinforcement of the status quo. In a certain sense it's even used correctly. The reform improves profits and strengthens corporate control of the markets and our political economy. So how ought "reform" be used? Further, what should its effects be? The word derives from a Latin "re" meaning again, and "formare" meaning to form Just like it sounds. Literally it meant to form again into something new and better. It is much stronger than the piecemeal connotations of today's English derivative - it is to drastically change a dysfunctional system into a functional one. Taking a hint from this older meaning, "reform" needs to mean a complete change in a system, not the little by little, baby step change we mean now. Its effect needs to be to make clear problems and reinforce real change, and not just cover up deeper failures to fix those problems, as it does now. To put it succinctly, "reform" itself needs some reform. OPINIONS The high cost of being an uninsured student GREGWILCOX Opinions writer For many students, health care has become an expensive commodity. In UVU student Jorgen Hanson's case, the high cost of a dental procedure threatens to put him in extensive debt. "Basically, the dentist told me that if I didn't get work done I'd be lucky to have teeth when I'm 40," Hanson said. "But the procedure will cost around $3,700." Since the work is quite necessary, Hanson intends to foot the bill with a credit card. His other options would be to get his root canals done at discount prices through dentists in training or through dentists in Mexico—both of which are somewhat precarious choices. But his dilemma is one'that is shared among many on campus: the highcost of being uninsured. Though statistics on the number of UVU students without insurance was not available, The Commonwealth Fund (a major philanthropic foundation) estimates that 29 percent of all young adults ages 19-29 are without insurance. That makes this group the largest segment of the uninsured population. Many of these young adults are students who lose coverage after graduating high school or college, or who while in college lose eligibility under their parent's plan. Unfor-' • tunately, many students at ; UVU find themselves in this situation, and, like Hanson, must pay extravagantly for important medical and health services, or simply go without them entirely. ; The result is that we ••; have many students who > avoid seeing doctors and '."-" dentists when they need to,because of the high cost ;J. such visits entail. What's ; worse is that when one of these uninsured students " suffers from an unexpected • health issue, they will likely; be unable to afford treat- •; ment and will accumulate a' large chunk of debt on top of any student loan debt they may have. So what is to be done? UVU could make insurance mandatory, as a handful of other universities have done. The problem with this is that the already high cost of tuition would go up even more. The real answer seems to extend well beyond this university and out to the federal government. We need large-scale health care reform that guarantees some basic coverage for every American if we wish to solve the uninsured college student problem. Unfortunately, the election of a republican senator in Massachusetts makes this goal even more unattainable than it has been these past months ' in the nation's capital. But, as Hanson points out, the preventive medi- "" cine and cost reduction that could be among the most beneficial effects of reforming our current system of health care just seems to make sense. "WhenHlNl was the big scare, most people didn't have a problem with getting a free vaccine, because they didn't want the health costs of not treating it," Hanson said. "I don't see having guaranteed basic health care being different than that." Foster Family Values DAVID SELF NEWLIN Opinions editor In the reddest state in the nation, a place where "family values" abound and the nuclear family is venerated perhaps more than anywhere else, when the legislature recommends a 10 percent cut in funding the foster care program ("Foster parents decry, possible cuts" Deseret News, Jan .21), Photo illustration by DAVID MOORE/ UVU Review The legislature proposes to cut an additional 10 percent from the budget of Utah's foster care program. what can be said but, "Are you kidding." No, it isn't a terrible joke. It's the legislature's catch all answer to the state's current revenue shortfalls - cut, cut, cut - even when it's at-risk children that are on the edge of the blade. Putting a child in a foster family is an absolute last resort. When a home environment is unlivable, and a child is in danger, or has nowhere else to go, the state provides them with a home in which they can have some semblance of stability. In return for the service of bringing a stranger's child into their home, foster families receive money to help them cover the cost of care. If the proposed cuts are carried out, foster families will receive less than $15 per day for their efforts to keep children safe and well cared for. Parents who take in kids with special needs would receive more. This is not the first time foster care has been on the cutting board - it has already been reduced some 5 percent, even in the midst of the program trying to attract more minority foster families to sign up to serve. This lack of protection for an essential program is apparently what passes for family values in the Beehive State. It's interesting to note too, that even as budgets tighten everywhere in the state (which is unavoidable when revenues fall so much), Utahans are not as averse to the possibility of tax increases as their elected representatives are. A recent poll by Dan Jones & Associates ("Poll: 53 percent of Utahans pick higher taxes instead of budget cuts" Deseret News, Jan. 21) shows that slightly more than half of constituents would be willing to pay higher taxes in order to keep state services available. The calculus seems to be very simple - children in desperate situations are in need of a state program, budgets are tight, Utahns are willing to pay more for state programs which presumably includes the foster program, ergo a raise in taxes is acceptable in order to keep this and other services operating. Foster families have received criticism for sup- , posedly "doing it for the money," that is, attempting to use the program to line their pockets. But $15 a day doesn't seem like much of an incentive for an unscrupulous family to take on the stresses and hardships involved in caring for these kids. In fact, it seems like a paltry sum. Taxes aren't always bad, and this is a perfect example of where they can be'put to tremendous use. The lesson should be learned that taxes can promote family values, too. |