The costs of college students' apathy toward health care
by Ethan Mermelstein
Columnists | 10/20/09
Posted online at 1:40 AM EST on 10/20/09
My favorite idealist, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, proposed in his Oct. 8 column, "If Congress fails to pass comprehensive health reform this year, its members should surrender health insurance in proportion with the American population that is uninsured." He argues that the excellent coverage provided to each member of Congress and their respective families creates a "lulling effect," which detaches them from the urgency of the issue at hand. A randomly selected, proportional removal of their insurance could help put Congress in better touch with an issue that is a matter of life and death for a significant portion of Americans.
If, for congressmen, insurance has this sort of "lulling effect," then being a student in college seems to have a coma/hibernation effect when it comes to the health care debate.
For several years following the United States' 2003 invasion of Iraq, college students were popularly deemed politically dispassionate and apathetic. This was mainly because, compared to its historical parallel of Vietnam, there was (and still is) a noticeable absence of large-scale student protest over the war. The world's perception of college-age students changed during the 2008 election as it was reminded of the potential power of the demographic's collective voice. For the first time in history, our nation saw an electoral outcome heavily determined by the youth's substantial "rocking" of the vote, both in turnout and campaigning.
Fast-forward to today: The college-age population, which less than a year ago was electrified with excitement, seems to be taking a long break from activism-perhaps the worst-timed break possible. Although the lack of fierce debate over the invasion of Iraq is embarrassing, the argument that the war doesn't have much bearing on the everyday lives of Americans because of the lack of a draft is an unfortunate excuse. It is impossible to make any such excuse for apathy when it comes to health care reform. Though Brandeis requires that each of its students is insured, the moment we graduate from here, health care will be our own problem. By the time that happens, though (assuming our government doesn't become completely incapacitated), the debate will be over with or without the input of the college-age demographic. For example, Kristof's Sept. 12 column follows the tragic story of Nikki White, a young girl who "had systemic lupus erythematosus, a chronic inflammatory disease that was diagnosed when she was 21 and gradually left her too sick to work. And once she lost her job, she lost her health insurance."
If, for congressmen, insurance has this sort of "lulling effect," then being a student in college seems to have a coma/hibernation effect when it comes to the health care debate.
For several years following the United States' 2003 invasion of Iraq, college students were popularly deemed politically dispassionate and apathetic. This was mainly because, compared to its historical parallel of Vietnam, there was (and still is) a noticeable absence of large-scale student protest over the war. The world's perception of college-age students changed during the 2008 election as it was reminded of the potential power of the demographic's collective voice. For the first time in history, our nation saw an electoral outcome heavily determined by the youth's substantial "rocking" of the vote, both in turnout and campaigning.
Fast-forward to today: The college-age population, which less than a year ago was electrified with excitement, seems to be taking a long break from activism-perhaps the worst-timed break possible. Although the lack of fierce debate over the invasion of Iraq is embarrassing, the argument that the war doesn't have much bearing on the everyday lives of Americans because of the lack of a draft is an unfortunate excuse. It is impossible to make any such excuse for apathy when it comes to health care reform. Though Brandeis requires that each of its students is insured, the moment we graduate from here, health care will be our own problem. By the time that happens, though (assuming our government doesn't become completely incapacitated), the debate will be over with or without the input of the college-age demographic. For example, Kristof's Sept. 12 column follows the tragic story of Nikki White, a young girl who "had systemic lupus erythematosus, a chronic inflammatory disease that was diagnosed when she was 21 and gradually left her too sick to work. And once she lost her job, she lost her health insurance."
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Michal
posted 10/20/09 @ 8:37 PM EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/aislin-bates-colorado-tod_n_327309.html
Post a Comment