Called for isolating AIDS carriers in 1992, not quarantine
Q: When you ran for the Senate back in 1992, you called for quarantining AIDS patients. Do you stand by that now?
A: I didn't say that we should quarantine. I said it was the first time in public health protocols that when we had an infectious disease
& we didn't really know just how extensive it could be, that we didn't isolate the carrier. Now, the headlines started saying that I called for quarantines, which I did not. I had simply made the point that in the late '80s, when we didn't know as much
as we do now about AIDS, we were acting more out of political correctness than we were about the normal public health protocols that we would have acted--as we have recently, for example, with avian flu--I spent months as a governor dealing with a
pandemic plan that we were looking at which called for isolating carriers if they contracted that disease. I'm not going to recant. Would I say it a little differently today? Sure, in light of 15 years of additional knowledge, I would.
1/3 self-insured; 1/3 don't want it; 1/3 can't afford it
Q: What can be done to provide coverage for the 47 million people don't have health insurance?
A: Of those 47 million, one-third don't have it because they are self-insured.
Another one-third don't have it because they think they're healthy and invincible. There is one-third that don't have it because they can't afford it. And then there are a lot of people who have insurance, but they're underinsured.
Source: 2007 Republican primary debate on Univision
Dec 9, 2007
Crisis from waiting until people are catastrophically ill
The biggest problem we have in this country is not a health care crisis, it is a health crisis. We spend $2 trillion a year on health care, and 80% of it goes to chronic disease, which means that what we really have to begin dealing with is turning the
system right side up, because it is upside down focused on waiting until people are catastrophically ill, & then we try to rush in with the most expensive modalities possible.
What we need to be doing is putting the real focus on preventing the illness
in the first place. It's the difference between either putting an ambulance at the bottom of the hill or building a fence at the top. We can afford universal coverage, but not until and not even close until we first have health, rather than just focus on
health coverage. Let me say the last thing we need to do is to believe that Michael Moore's idea is good and we can all go to Cuba and get health care. I don't mind shipping him down there, but the rest of us I'd like to get our care here.
FactCheck: 2/3 of uninsured can't afford insurace, not 1/3
Gov. Huckabee hypothesized, "Of those 47 million uninsured, 1/3 don't have it because they are self-insured. Another 1/3 don't have it because they think they're healthy and invincible. There is 1/3 that don't have it because they can't afford it."
We
asked Huckabee's campaign how he knew that 1/3 thought they were "invincible," but we've received no response. We can find no studies that support the "invincibility" theory. [The closest is that] about 3 million people are uninsured because they decline
available workplace health insurance.
Huckabee also errs in claiming that only 1/3 can't afford insurance. About 2/3 of the uninsured are considered low-income families. Huckabee would be correct to say that 1/3 of the nonelderly uninsured are living
below the poverty level.
Huckabee's claim that 1/3 of the uninsured are self-insured is a meaningless statement. In fact, anyone without health insurance must rely on their own resources to pay medical bills. That's what being self-insured means.
We don't have a healthcare system; it's a healthcare maze
We don't have a health care system. We have a health care maze. And we don't have a health care crisis. We have a health crisis. 80% of the $2 trillion we spend on health care in this country is spent on chronic disease.
If we don't change the health of this nation by focusing on prevention, we're never going to catch up with the costs no matter what plan we have.
The reality is it's a health crisis, and
I would further say that one of the challenges we face is that a lot of the Democrats want to turn it over to the government, while the Republicans want to turn it over completely to the private insurance companies.
I think the better idea is to turn it over to each individual consumer and let him or her make that choice. I trust me a lot more than I trust government or a lot more than I trust the insurance companies.
Individually-controlled insurance, not government SCHIP
Q: President Bush last week vetoed the SCHIP plan to expand health coverage for millions of lower-income children. Would you?
A: The president was caught in a tough political battle. Unfortunately, the issue wasn't about children; the issue was about
political posture. Many of the kids who would be covered under the expanded SCHIP are people who already have insurance. If I were president, I would never let that get to the point where that's the only option you have.
Q: But if it got there, would
you have vetoed the bill?
A: I'm not absolutely certain that that's going to be the right way. There's a real problem in the health care issue where Democrats say they want the government to control it. Some Republicans say, we want private insurance
or businesses to control it. The real answer is: let individuals control their own, and let them own it. That's the real need, because I don't trust government and I don't trust the insurance companies. I trust me with my health care.
Portable medical records that YOU own, not your doctor
We need to have portable medical records so that your health care records go with you. They don't stay with your doctor.
You shouldn't have to ask permission to see the records of your own body. Those are your own records. They don't belong to anybody else.
Source: 2007 GOP Presidential Forum at Morgan State University
Sep 27, 2007
System is upside down; focuses on intervention after illness
Q: What does your health care plan contain to address racial disparities in access to care?
A: The first problem with our current health care system is that it's upside down. It focuses on intervention. We wait until people are catastrophically ill,
and then we spend enormous amounts of money trying to fix them. We need to be putting the money on the preventive side. Prevention is a lot less expensive than is intervention. The second thing, there has to be ownership of the individual consumer.
As long as the government, the employer, as long as the doctor is in charge of your health care, and you have no idea what it costs, and you have no idea what they're doing, and you don't control it, we're never going to get the system fixed.
And the third thing that has to happen is that we have portable medical records. And the policies that we can put in place have to start with individuals buying in, not only on insurance, but buying in on health, their own personal, to start with.
Oppose mandated health insurance and universal coverage
Q: Nations with socialized medicine reduced the cost of their healthcare systems by restricting patients' access that needed treatments and healthcare rationing. Will you protect the availability of needed medical care by opposing current efforts to
subject Americans to government-mandated health insurance and universal coverage?
Insurance reward for avoiding tobacco, alcohol, obesity
Q: Healthcare consumes up to 17% of our GNP. It appears that lifestyles that are based in moral principles would reduce healthcare expenditures. Would you support a private healthcare approach that rewards behavior that promotes moral lifestyles--
that is, avoiding alcohol and tobacco consumption, as well as obesity reduction, exercise and nutrition that promotes health?
Give Americans Congress' healthcare, or give Congress ours
Q: What do you think of Sen. Grassley's compromise plan to cover 3.2 million more poor children by raising the cigarette tax, which Pres. Bush has threatened to veto--who do you side with, Pres. Bush or Sen. Grassley?
A: I'd like to side with the
people of America who really are looking for a lot better action than they're getting out of their president or Congress. You know, if you want to know how to fix it, I've got a solution. Either give every American the same kind of health care that
Congress has, or make Congress have the same kind of health care that every American has. They'll get it fixed. We really have an incredible problem because our system is upside-down. It focuses on intervention at the catastrophic level of disease rather
than really focusing on prevention. So we've got a system that, no matter how much money we pour into it, we're not going to fix it, until we begin to address the fact that this country has put its focus not on wellness, not on health, but on sickness.
Dems want government in charge; GOP want consumers in charge
Q: What's the biggest difference or two that you see between the Democratic & Republican fields?
A: The Republicans want to win the war in Iraq; the Democrats just want to get out. That's the big difference on Iraq. The 2nd difference I see is that the
Democrats really want the government to be in charge of things like health care. They want them to be more responsible for choices about our doctors. And I think Republicans still want every individual consumer to be making those very critical decisions
about "Who is my doctor and what treatment I'm going to get and where am I going to get it."
Q: So you don't accept the notion that Ralph Nader would suggest that there really is no significance difference between Democrats and Republicans?
A: Well,
somebody would have had to have slept through both debates to think that there are no differences. There are clear differences. The good news is the people of America will have a contrast. And both sides are legitimately trying to talk about some issues.
ARKids: Prevention less expensive than sick children
Meetings in Arkansas brought forth a simple but revolutionary idea that gave children preventive care. The ARKids First program was born. I introduced it to the legislature in January, 1997. It passed without a negative vote.
As I prepared to sign the
bill, I found myself reaching for a crayon and probably made history by being the first to sign a bill with a crayon. The crayon became one of the symbols of the plan.
The ARKids First program has been successful in insuring more than 60,000 children.
Many actually welcomed the small co-payment that was required since it gave them a sense of responsibility and a feeling of not being on welfare.
I am convinced it is less expensive to prevent a problem than it is to try and fix it once it has grown
into something much larger. The value of ARKids First will be easier to see as children grow up not having missed school because of chronic illness. Is it costly? It is not as costly as having large numbers of sick children.
Focus on health & prevention, not just disease treatment
The health care system in this nation is irreparably broken, in part because it is only a "health care" system. We have failed to create a "health system." We focus on spending money to treat chronic diseases, but seem oblivious to the urgent
need to focus on prevention of those diseases.
Most government grants are given to research for treatment of disease and to find ways to aggressively treat illness. Preventive medicine, until recently, was almost considered a form of quackery.
Source: From Hope to Higher Ground, by Mike Huckabee, p. 58-59
Jan 4, 2007
STOP the culture of chronic disease via self-discipline
Do not smoke - PERIOD!
Exercise a minimum of three times per week, at least 30 minutes per session.
Set specific, challenging, but realistic fitness goals for the month and the year.
Eliminate processed sugar from your diet as much as possible, if not entirely.
Do not eat anything with partially hydrogenated vegetable oil.
Eat five servings a day minimum of fruits and vegetables.
Insist on only whole grain breads, pastas, cereals.
Eliminate fried foods from your diet.
Look for ways to become an empowered health consumer.
Regularly read articles and books on health and fitness.
Do little things like taking the stairs instead of elevators, parking in the far end of parking lots, and walking to do errands.
Guaranteed medical care not government's responsibility
Indicate which principles you support regarding health issues.
Ensure that citizens have access to basic health care through managed care, insurance reforms, or state funded care where necessary.
Transfer more existing Medicaid recipients into
managed care programs.
Limit the amount of damages that can be awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits.
Support patients' right to sue their HMOs.
Guaranteed medical care to all citizens is not a responsibility of state government.
Source: 2002 AR Gubernatorial National Political Awareness Test
Nov 1, 2002
ARKids First program: record decreases in uninsured
We led the nation in the percentage decrease of uninsured citizens, in large part because of the passage four years ago of the ARKids First program, which is one of the nation’s premier
programs for health insurance. Many were thrilled when Columbia University released the report last year that showed Arkansas reduced child poverty more than any other state.
Source: State of the State address to the Arkansas legislature
Jan 9, 2001
Designed ARKids for preventive healthcare for kids
In 1996, there were 110,000 Arkansas children whose parents were working and had avoided welfare but whose income was not enough to afford adequate health insurance for their children.
These kids fell into an unfair trap. They were the children of parents who earned too much to qualify for Medicaid and not enough to afford quality private health insurance plans.
These were children whose chronic illnesses were often going untreated.
Since its conception in 1997, the ARKids First program has been incredibly successful in insuring more than 60,000 children.
The real value of ARKids First will not be seen immediately, but I'm convinced it's less expensive to prevent a problem than it is to try to fix it once it has grown into something much larger.
Supports consumer-driven "medical IRA" with tax-free money
The proposal which would give people an opportunity to have a "medical IRA" in which tax-free money could earn interest to cover out-of-pocket medical expenses,
and the principal be used to purchase a catastrophic health insurance program, should be examined. Overall, I believe that the key is to create a more consumer-driven., less regulated situation.
Source: Responses to Associated Press Questionnaire for AR Senate
Nov 1, 1992
No additional AIDS spending; cancer & vascular victims first
At the present time, the per capita federal spending on AIDS is $15,450. That compares with $285 spent per capita on cancer victims, $33 per capita spent for victims of heart and vascular diseases, and $25 per capita spent on victims of diabetes.
In light of the extraordinary funds already being given for AIDS research, it does not seem that additional Federal spending can be justified.
Source: Responses to Associated Press Questionnaire for AR Senate
Nov 1, 1992
Ban smoking in all public places
As a long-time sufferer from extremely sensitive allergies to tobacco smoke (I take an allergy shot each week for this condition), I would like to see smoking banned in public places, or at least a requirement that smoking cannot take place when it would
infringe upon the clean air of nonsmokers. For some of us, it is not a mere nuisance--it represents a very definite health threat. It should not be appropriate to indiscriminately blow toxic smoke on other people.
Source: Responses to Associated Press Questionnaire for AR Senate
Nov 1, 1992
Isolate carriers of this plague of AIDS
If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague.
Source: Responses to Associated Press Questionnaire for AR Senate
Nov 1, 1992
No federal pre-emption of employee health plan regulation.
Huckabee adopted the National Governors Association position paper:
The Issue
In 1999, 42.6 million Americans did not have health insurance. All states have been fervently working to reduce the number of uninsured Americans, to make health insurance more affordable and secure, and to provide quality health care at a reasonable cost to the uninsured. However, the federal government has also expressed an interest in this issue. Any action taken at the federal level could have serious implications for traditional state authority to regulate the health insurance industry and protect consumers.
NGA’s Position
Although the Governors are extremely sensitive to the concerns of large multi-state employers, the fact remains that the complete federal preemption of state laws relating to employee health plans in the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) is the greatest single barrier to many state reform and patient protection initiatives.
The Governors support efforts designed to enable small employers to join together to participate more effectively in the health insurance market. In fact, Governors have taken the lead in facilitating the development of such partnerships and alliances. However, these partnerships must be carefully structured and regulated by state agencies in order to protect consumers and small businesses from fraud and abuse and underinsurance. NGA opposes attempts to expand federal authority under ERISA. The Governors have identified the prevention of such federal legislation in the 107th Congress as a top legislative priority.
States have the primary responsibility for health insurance regulation. Across the nation, Governors are working to protect consumers and patients and to properly regulate the complicated health insurance industry.
Source: National Governors Association "Issues / Positions" 01-NGA13 on Oct 5, 2001
Protect state tobacco settlement funds from federal seizure.
Huckabee adopted a letter to Congressional leaders from 53 Governors:
As you know, preserving and protecting the state tobacco settlement funds is the nation’s Governors’ highest priority. We strongly urge you to reach final agreement and pass the conference report on the emergency supplemental appropriations bill soon, and to retain the Senate provision that protects our settlement funds from federal seizure.
Many of our state legislatures are currently in session, and some have already completed work on their budgets. Therefore, it is critical that conferees reach agreement quickly on this issue. Governors are unified in their commitment to ensuring that the funds remain in the states and that there be no restrictions on states’ ability to tailor spending to meet the needs of their citizens.
We offer our strongest support for conferees to recede to the Senate version of the bill containing the Hutchison/Graham bipartisan tobacco recoupment protection legislation.
Source: National Governor's Association letter to Congress 99-NGA31 on Apr 14, 1999
