Exit polls in Pennsylvania showed that voters concerned about the economy and health care broke decidedly for Barack Obama.

In the days following the election, however, there was speculation that campaign promises about health care would have to make their way to the back burner in favor of the more pressing needs of the economy. Many doubt that bold domestic initiatives are feasible in a time of financial uncertainty.

But what if we knew that the cost of failing to fix our broken health-care system would be greater than the price of comprehensive reform? While there is no question that the next administration needs to take immediate action to stabilize our financial and housing markets, there is a compelling economic case for keeping health-care reform at the top of the agenda.

In the face of historic job losses and the worst financial crisis in 80 years, why did health care remain a salient issue in the final weeks of a tough campaign? The answer is simple: When people are worried about their jobs, they are nervous about the security of their health coverage. And when people are trying to figure out how they are going to pay their bills, they are concerned about being able to afford medical care.

Health-care costs are growing faster than wages, making health insurance more and more unaffordable for more and more U.S. families every day. Recently released research by the New America Foundation indicates that half of the families in Pennsylvania will have to spend more than 50 percent of their household income on health insurance by 2016 if something isn't done.

Our economy cannot recover if Americans need to spend a large and increasing share of their income on health insurance. Likewise, we know that the uninsured get sick unnecessarily, stay sick longer, and are less productive in the workplace.

Meanwhile, rising health-care costs are undermining the ability of U.S. businesses to compete globally, putting good U.S. jobs at risk. This is old news for a Pennsylvania economy that has shed more than 207,000 manufacturing jobs since 2001. More than 26,000 Pennsylvanians joined the unemployment ranks in August alone.

U.S. manufacturers pay an average of $2.38 per worker per hour for health benefits. Their foreign trading partners pay 96 cents. This means U.S. manufacturing companies give up almost $1.50 per worker per hour to their competitors because of health-care costs. Add it up nationwide, and the country spent $40 billion more on employee health care in 2005 than did its major trading partners.

There is a compelling moral case for health-care reform. But making sure every American has quality health coverage is also an economic imperative. Pennsylvania's economy lost nearly $5 billion because of the poor health and shorter life spans of the uninsured in 2007. This is more than $4,200 per uninsured resident - close to the cost of buying that resident an individual insurance policy, according to our research.

In the early 1990s, many Americans fought to protect the status quo of our health-care system. But health insurance and health care look different today. Hardworking Americans are paying more for less, employers are asking workers to bear a greater share of the health-care burden, and millions more have joined the ranks of the uninsured.

The economic and social costs of failing to reform our health system are high, and they will only rise over time. We must reform our nation's health-care system - not despite our economic crisis, but precisely because of the impact it has on U.S. workers and businesses.

During his campaign, President-elect Barack Obama asked record-breaking crowds at his rallies two questions: "Are you fired up? Are you ready to go?" When it comes to our health-care crisis, voters have answered: We are and we must.