[Reporter's View] Healthcare bills should put patients first

With negotiations between the ruling and opposition parties over the leadership of the second half of the 22nd National Assembly at a standstill, it remains unclear which party will chair the Health and Welfare Committee.

Although the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) has agreed to relinquish the committee chairmanship it held during the first half of the Assembly to the People Power Party (PPP), the PPP rather insisted that the DPK must give up the chairmanship of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, calling for renewed negotiations over committee assignments.

According to political sources, the PPP is even considering giving up all seven committee chairmanships allocated to it unless the DPK reverses its unilateral appointment of chairs for 11 standing committees, including the Legislation and Judiciary Committee.

As a result, there is now a possibility that the DPK, rather than the PPP, could ultimately retain the chairmanship of the Health and Welfare Committee during the second half of the Assembly.

Because the committee chair has significant influence over the progress and outcome of major healthcare bills currently pending in the National Assembly, medical associations, pharmacists' organizations, and government agencies are closely monitoring the progress.

One question naturally arises. Should we accept the current situation, where Korea’s healthcare legislation, which deeply affects the health and lives of the public and Korea’s healthcare environment as a whole, is determined by the political balance between the ruling and opposition parties or by the influence of particular professional groups such as physicians and pharmacists, as fate?

Rather than functioning as a legislature centered on the public interest, the National Assembly often appears to operate according to the competing interests and lobbying power of political parties and professional organizations. Shouldn’t greater efforts be made to change this reality?

Lawmakers and professional organizations alike should reflect on the fact that the fate of major healthcare legislation can turn 180 degrees depending on which party controls the Health and Welfare Committee or how many physicians and pharmacists sit on it.

If a legislative proposal genuinely benefits public health and strengthens the financial sustainability of the National Health Insurance system, the National Assembly should function in a way that enables the most rational outcome regardless of political affiliation or professional background.

The situation surrounding the ‘Limited INN Prescribing Bill (Generic Prescribing Bill),’ which was introduced to help address drug shortages, illustrates this concern, as its prospects are likely to depend on whether the ruling or opposition party chairs the Health and Welfare Committee during the second half of the current National Assembly.

The PPP and physicians argue that even limited international non-proprietary name prescribing should never be permitted because it could undermine physicians' prescribing authority. In contrast, the DPK and pharmacists contend that limited INN prescribing should be introduced as soon as possible to address shortages of essential medicines and improve the financial sustainability of the National Health Insurance system.

The National Assembly's legislative process is essentially being swayed by the political calculations of ruling and opposition parties and the vested interests of specific professional groups, such as doctors and pharmacists. As a result, genuine people-centered policymaking has become increasingly difficult to find.

The National Assembly is the sanctuary of the people's will. Only when lawmakers move beyond partisan politics and professional self-interest to focus on protecting public health, improving Korea's healthcare system, and ensuring the sustainability of the National Health Insurance system will the Assembly truly fulfill its purpose.

While politicians weigh the interests of the medical and pharmaceutical sectors and calculate political gains and losses, the voices of ordinary citizens, the practical beneficiaries of healthcare policy, are too often left out. The goal of legislation should never be measured by whether it strengthens or weakens a particular political party or professional group.

Regardless of which party ultimately chairs the Health and Welfare Committee or how physicians and pharmacists are represented on the committee, legislative review should proceed in a manner that preserves consistency in national healthcare policy and upholds the principle of putting the public first.