You seem to read this as suggesting that these measures, which he says would benefit all Americans and, along the way, reduce racial disparities, would amount to reparations by a different name.

Yet, as I’ve pointed out, you can’t just call any program “reparations.” In particular, if most of the money goes to white people, then it doesn’t matter than blacks also benefit, or even benefit disproportionately.

In other words, you can call it “reparations,” but you’re just not paying black people for their history if most of the money goes to white people.

I agree that it’s not your obligation to fix the problem. But good public health policy will address not just a generic, hypothetical citizen’s health needs, but to the extent that they vary, the health needs of different demographic groups.

For instance, it would be inappropriate to ignore that women have somewhat different health care needs than men, or that poor or less educated Americans tend to have different health concerns, and often require different solutions, than well-to-do and well-educated citizens.

Now, I’m also conscious of the fact that racial health disparities in this country are due to our nation’s appalling history of slavery and Jim Crow discrimination. I don’t believe this means we have a greater obligation to tailor health care remedies to race rather than to, say, gender, but it doesn’t hurt to bear in mind when thinking about what all of us have inherited as Americans from those who came before us.