EDITORIAL: Do no harm

In the realm of public policy, there's a timeless adage that serves as a warning to overzealous reformers: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Perhaps nowhere does this wisdom ring truer than in the current debate over Idaho's participation in the WWAMI medical education program.

For 53 years, this partnership with the University of Washington and other Western states has been the backbone of physician training in Idaho. It has created a robust pipeline of medical professionals, with an impressive 51% of Idaho WWAMI students returning to practice in our state — a figure that rises to 70% when considering students from all partner states. These statistics represent countless lives saved, communities served and a half-century of health care excellence.

Now, some lawmakers want to dismantle this proven system in favor of an uncertain alternative. House Bill 176 proposes to sever our ties with WWAMI and establish new partnerships by 2027, citing the need for Idaho to have its own medical school. While the ambition is admirable, the logic is flawed.

The bill's supporters seem to overlook a fundamental reality: Building a medical education program isn't like constructing a building. You can't simply draw up blueprints, pour the foundation and expect it to be operational in three years. WWAMI's network of 250 clinical rotation positions across 42 sites in Idaho represents decades of carefully cultivated relationships, trust and expertise. Over the years, it's developed an entire ecosystem of providers. 

The timing of this proposed upheaval couldn't be worse. Idaho ranks last in the nation in physicians per capita. Our rural communities, in particular, struggle to attract and retain medical professionals. WWAMI had an underserved rural track that has been specifically designed to address this challenge. Why would we disrupt a program that's actively working to solve our most pressing health care needs?

Some argue that ideological differences with the University of Washington justify this separation. But let's remember that WWAMI's success lies in its focus on medical education excellence, not political alignment. The program has already demonstrated its flexibility by accommodating Idaho's specific requirements on abortion. 

In health care, stability and proven success are invaluable assets. WWAMI has delivered both for over five decades. Before we take a sledgehammer to this foundation, we should ask ourselves: Are we really fixing something, or are we breaking something that works?

The Legislature should reject HB 176 and instead focus on strengthening and expanding our partnership with WWAMI. After all, in medicine as in policy, the rule should be: First, do no harm.