Health Reform Failure
In 1966 - just before Medicare and Medicaid were launched - 47 million Americans were uninsured. By 1975, the United States had reached an all time low of 21 million without coverage. Now, according to the Census Bureau's latest figures, we're back where we started, with 47 million uninsured in 2006 - up 2.2 million since 2005. But this time, most of the uninsured are neither poor nor elderly.
The middle class is being priced out of healthcare. Virtually all of this year's increase was among families with incomes above $50,000; in fact, two-thirds of the newly uncovered were in the above-$75,000 group. And full-time workers accounted for 56 percent of the increase, with their children making up much of the rest.
The new Census numbers are particularly disheartening for anyone hoping for a Massachusetts miracle. In the Commonwealth, 651,000 residents are uninsured, 65 percent more than the figure used by state leaders in planning for health reform. Their numbers came from a telephone survey done in English and Spanish. But that misses people who lack a land-line phone - 43.9 percent of phoneless adults are uninsured, according to other studies.
It also skips over the 523,000 non-English speakers in Massachusetts whose native language isn't Spanish (e.g. Portuguese, Chinese, or Haitian-Creole), another group with a high uninsurance rate. In contrast, the Census Bureau goes door-to-door for its survey and has translators for almost every language. It gets a more complete picture.
In sum, Massachusetts health reform planners have been wishing away a quarter of a million uninsured people. Recent Patrick administration claims that health reform is succeeding are based on cooked books. According to the state's figures, almost half of the previously uninsured gained coverage under the health reform bill by July 1. But according to the Census Bureau, the new sign-ups amount to less than one-quarter of the uninsured. Moreover, it's likely that much of that gain has already been wiped out by shrinking job-based coverage - a longstanding and nationwide trend.
Why has progress been so meager? Because most of the promised new coverage is of the "buy it yourself" variety, with scant help offered to the struggling middle class. According to the Census Bureau, only 28 percent of Massachusetts uninsured have incomes low enough to qualify for free coverage. Thirty-four percent more can get partial subsidies - but the premiums and co-payments remain a barrier for many in this near-poor group.
And 244,000 of Massachusetts uninsured get zero assistance - just a stiff fine if they don't buy coverage. A couple in their late 50s faces a minimum premium of $8,638 annually, for a policy with no drug coverage at all and a $2,000 deductible per person before insurance even kicks in. Such skimpy yet costly coverage is, in many cases, worse than no coverage at all. Illness will still bring crippling medical bills - but the $8,638 annual premium will empty their bank accounts even before the bills start arriving. Little wonder that barely 2 percent of those required to buy such coverage have thus far signed up.
While the middle class sinks, the health reform law has buoyed our state's wealthiest health institutions. Hospitals like Massachusetts General are reporting record profits and enjoying rate increases tucked into the reform package. Blue Cross and other insurers that lobbied hard for the law stand to gain billions from the reform, which shrinks their contribution to the state's free care pool and will force hundreds of thousands to purchase their defective products. Meanwhile, new rules for the free care pool will drastically cut funding for the hundreds of thousands who remain uninsured, and for the safety-net hospitals and clinics that care for them. (Disclosure - we've practiced for the past 25 years at a public hospital that is currently undergoing massive budget cuts.)
Health reform built on private insurance isn't working and can't work; it costs too much and delivers too little. At present, bureaucracy consumes 31 percent of each healthcare dollar. The Connector - the new state agency created to broker coverage under the reform law - is adding another 4.5 percent to the already sky-high overhead charged by private insurers. Administrative costs at Blue Cross are nearly five times higher than Medicare's and 11 times those in Canada's single payer system. Single payer reform could save $7.7 billion annually on paperwork and insurance profits in Massachusetts, enough to cover all of the uninsured and to upgrade coverage for the rest of us.
Of course, single payer reform is anathema to the health insurance industry. But breaking their stranglehold on our health system and our politicians is the only way for health reform to get beyond square one.
Dr. Steffie Woolhandler and Dr. David Himmelstein co-founded Physicians for a National Health Program and are primary care doctors at Cambridge Hospital.
© 2007 The Boston Globe
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
27 Comments so far
Show AllThe American Way is to provide the least while extracting the maximum possible from the customer. Fairness is not in it.
Veteran '66-68
I see that Hillary already has her army out on the airwaves pushing her gimmicks with all sorts of foggy, deliberately deceptive double-speak.
when bill clinton left office,there was enough surplus to buy every citizen healthcare.we have financed trillions for an unnecessary illegal war,when we should have seen our money go into our own infrastructure.i paid blue cross,for years,for my children,including an annual fee(whether we used it or not)only to find out that it only covered mundane visits to the g.p.my own health insurance was flagged and taken away,because my provider was afraid i had something long term and costly.WE DO NOT WANT INSURANCE COMPANIES,TO BE A PART IN OUR HEALTH CARE !!THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE FILLED WITH CORRUPTION AND DISCOMPASSIONATE GREEDY PIGS !
"As Thom Hartmann repeatedly says: BY LAW, corporations are required to show a profit, above all else. Blue Cross, AETNA, CIGNA, United Healthcare, and all the others are required to make a profit on our health and well-being."
I thought Blue Cross was not-for-profit. Mine is in PA. It's still over $400 a month for minimalist coverage. The others wouldn't even take me.
"You can EASILY get a major medical for a couple for $200.00 a month with a $1000 deductible. There is no reason NO reason for somebody making 75K to not have insurance."
You have no idea what you're talking about. None.
The REASONS are PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. And AGING. Not to mention we all don't make $75,000.
The cheapest policy I could purchase for myself if $415 a month. Not a couple: myself. And I don't make half of $75,000. And if I incur a major expense, I'm risking bankruptcy even though I'm insured. And thanks to Democrats like Joe Biden, there's no bankruptcy leniency: I lose my home. Dumbass!
The only people getting policies for $100 a month are those who don't need them. If you're a young healthy know-it-all loudmouth, the world looks just dandy for you. Congratufuckilations.
The health care debate is about rationing health care rather than providing care. Rationing means denying or delaying access to health care for the undeserving poor. Any "pre-exising condition" such as being born of woman, is an excuse to reject a prospective patient.
The arguments about health care consider a person needing care as a "consumer" of the products and services provided by the health care "industry". I woke up this morning and decided to consume some health care at my local hospital.
Tying health care to employment requires a prospective employee to forsee the future of the company since an aging employee would be unlikely to obtain affordable health care should the company go offshore, or fail, before the employee is dead.
Good question, duchaspa.
The healthcare "industry"...when did it get declared an industry? At what precise moment did we all decide that it's okay for health insurance companies to change the rules?
As Thom Hartmann repeatedly says: BY LAW, corporations are required to show a profit, above all else. Blue Cross, AETNA, CIGNA, United Healthcare, and all the others are required to make a profit on our health and well-being.
Isn't it funny that its okay to profit off our physical health and well-being, but damn all of us if we DARE link religion and profit in the same sentence.
It gets sicker and more twisted every day.
+
Since when has health care been an "industry".Maybe that's where the problem lies ,the profitisation of everything.
Will USA churches and Synagogues be listed soon on the stock exchange. Will volunteer societys aalso be for profit ,the REd Cross, Unicef etc.
"Will they charge us soon for the air we breathe? "Chief Seattle in end 19th cent. So we pay to be born ,we pay to eat and breathe and pee etc and we pay to die.
The USA is killing the world with the profit motive.
the insurance companies are the doctors,they specialize in blood-letting and leeches.
Wow, someone has figured out how copy and paste works. Same exact text in every thread.
Can I borrow $10,000 from you so I can withdraw it?
I think this is from someone who lives in the upper 20% of America, and has forgotten this. Lots of people in this country are working two jobs just to get buy. Or a gazillion hours of overtime on one job. These people aren't doing that so they can invest more with their brokers. They are doing this to survive. They'd laugh at you if you told them to come up with $500 that wasn't in the budget already. Much less $10,000.
Thus, you've hit on the structure of America with your copy and paste campaign. If we had $10,000,000,000,000.00, we could have an impact on the direction of this country. That's America today. The people with $10,000,000,000,000.00 get a say in what's going on.
What the rest of us need is a grassroots political movement that's build on the very basic idea that everyone gets a say in what happens in this country. You don't have to have $10,000,000,000,000.00. One person, one vote, everyone create and staying equal as we go through this life. That's the radical notion that this country was founded on. Not the notion that someone who can control $10,000,000,000,000.00 gets to make the rules.
Who has $10,000? My mother and I are living from month to month on Social Security. A broken hot water heater and some fire insurance has us planning our meals very carefully. I just turned 65. After over two decades with no health insurance, I have Medicare, a drug plan paid by Medicaid and a Medigap plan I pay for. Would that my dear late husband had made it to 65. But, you see, when you are chronically ill and deteriorating gradually before retirement age, you frequently cannot get the health care in time. Bob, a man with two degrees, died blind, unable to walk, feed himself, control his bowels mostly because it was years too late by the time he qualified for the preventive medical insurance he needed. Am I bitter? You bet. It nearly killed me, the caregiver, too. I saved my own life just barely outliving my husband and by declaring bankruptcy so I could use my limited resources for medical treatment for my uninsurable "pre-existing conditions." But you can't count on that any more. I care for my mother now and have been a resource for my children. What a difference health insurance makes.
the spin goes on and on
I have been pushing this idea in hopes that it will traction. As an american it sems that concerned individuals seem to have little effect in bringing about change. Many individuals of character (Cindy Sheehan/Nader) and many groups (ACLU/Anti-War movement) can not penetrate the blanket of dollars that corporations use to suppress meaningful change and more importantly even let fellow american understand how many americans do NOT approve of the direction, ethics and policy of this once great nation.
I suggest that a a coalition of ALL groups (Immigration/Anti-War/Anti-globalization Healthcare/Free Speech/Free Press- and just concerned Americans in general) combine and simultaneously withdraw an average of 10,000 dollars oout of the banking/brokerage section of this country for sa one week. If a combined group of 10,000,000 people withdrew an average of $10,000 dollars - we would effectively have removed 100 billion in cash - but due to fractional reserve banking as much as 10 TRILLION dollars out of the economy.
OUR MONEY - they use to finance deadbeat corporations (such as Enron and worldcomm amongst many other corupt anti-american people corporations) -not to mention the governement who would rather show 50 people protesting in Burma a dozen times in a day - but not the 100,000 in Washington DC on September 15th or the one million in NYC during the Republican National Convention - as well as countless other examples. They are using OUR MONEY as collateral to do harm to US.
If -it is possible to combine our goals into one goal - which is to let these corporations/governmets KNOW that we KNOW - they are sing OUR MONEY to finance a WAR against US - and we will move it to Switzerland or some other country - just like they outsource oor jobs - we could single handly achieve the greatest worldwide non-violent most effective protest in the history on mankind.
We already know - that Mexico's biggest foreing exchange generator is immigrants sending money back home - more than oil!! - Imagine the message we would be able to send to all oppressed people everywhere - if we could successfully withdraw upto 10 trillion dollars in funds from the worlds largest economy !! All of a sudden the contempt from our congressman, senators, police, banks, corporations and brokerage houses would shrivel to the size of a raisun in the sun.
What do you guys think! I see no other way for americans to restore their voice in thie governance of our country - with out getting arrested/fired/balcklisted ad nauseum!!!!!
Universal Healthcare
It's free for everyone
It's an inalienable right
I say it again.
Universal Healthcare
It's free for everyone
It's an inalienable right
So now let's get to work to make Universal Healthcare the best health care we can.
I think I can, I think I can, I think I can and up the steep hill we climb little by little.
nwfisher writes:
You can EASILY get a major medical for a couple for $200.00 a month with a $1000 deductible.
What planet are you shopping on?!
Foraker says:
Under the plan backed by Kucinich, don't the health care industry employees pretty much get to join unemployment rolls right away?
No, the Kucinich plan has a 15-year roll out. They get a 15-year notice to find other work, preferably something that does not fall into the category of parasite-on-the-system.
Our initial assessment of Hillary's healthcare proposal suggests that the healthcare industry will be ecstatic.
In a transparent effort to pander to health insurance, Big Pharma, and other special interests, Hillary has proposed a plan, which ensures that insurance-creep and a squirt gun to fight a forest fire will be invested. Unfortunately, it has about as much of a prospect of controlling costs, expanding access, enhancing quality, and bolstering patient safety as the current fiasco.
Nevertheless, she deserves kudos for artfully moving from a principled political position, albeit naive and ineptly executed, to 'something is better than nothing.' http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20822145/site/newsweek/page/0/
Now, for an encore, let's hear her argue with Bush about his most recent 'something better than nothing'
troop reduction proposal in Iraq.
Her implementation of a truly universal healthcare system for the United States would take far longer than even Bush's Iraq debacle.
God, I am so glad to hear you people talk about HILLARY CLINTON'S SCAM of a plan.
She wants healthcare INSURANCE for all.
NO!
We want the insurance companies to get the hell out of the picture. We want our doctors to be the deciders, not the insurance companies.
PLEASE, Common Dreams: Run stories about Hillary's scam and all such "healthcare insurance for all" scams.
It is truly reaching the crisis point, and Clinton will make things worse. She bought and paid for by the insurance companies.
I've followed Woolhandler's and Himmelstein's work for a decade now, their analyses are outstanding and to the mark. Let me add here what I see as the biggest fault of a private insurance system: the preexisting conditions clause. Since health insurance is often tied into one's work it ends with your employment there. Any health problems that you developed by then or which surfaces may, and often will, prevent you from getting coverage with a new insurer. They won't cover sick people, except sometimes for outrageous premiums. That's why this system is incurably sick.
Doesn't Edwards's plan simply allow everyone to choose between Medicare and private insurance, with the expectation (realistic or not) that Medicare can provide lower premiums? I suppose he hopes that traditional healthcare companies will wither on the vine, which gives their employees time to find other work. Under the plan backed by Kucinich, don't the health care industry employees pretty much get to join unemployment rolls right away? Seems to be a much more painful route.
dponcy:
"Screw them all." NOT ALL!...
http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/a-healthy-nation/
I will vote for a damned Republican before I support one of these Dems who would force me to personally subsidize the insurance companies. Screw them all.
Beware the "universal health care" plan that Hillary Clinton is unveiling this week--it's a scam. Just more of the same insurance industry payoffs.
Yep, this is what I call Sicko. And now just today Hillary has introduced her health reform plan, which is Massachusetts' "reform" plan multiplied by 50. It will be a complete failure, just as the MASS plan is. It boggles the mind why any politician would pledge to model their health insurance plan after auto insurance. Don't they know that millions of motorists drive around every day without auto insurance? They should know. Because there are so many uninsured motorists, the legislatures actually require auto insurance companies to offer you UNINSURED Motorist Coverage, in case you are involved in a crash with an uninsured motorist. The reason, presumably, that so many motorists drive w/o insurance is because they can't afford it. Yet auto insurance is only a small fraction of the cost of health insurance for most people. Even with the promised subsidies, millions of people will not be able to afford any of the profiteering health insurance plans. Any progressive who continues to support Hillary after hearing her HILLArious health proposal is not truly a progressive. They are a Republican in sheeps clothing.
Do what WalMart and other big box stores do when customers have become to sick to shop--suppl'm with electric carts.
http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/a-healthy-nation/
$770/month per couple, with a $2000 deductible
You can EASILY get a major medical for a couple for $200.00 a month with a $1000 deductible. There is no reason NO reason for somebody making 75K to not have insurance.
either of these two fine doctors would make great heads of HHS in a new administration...or how about surgeon general