September, 20 2011, 11:17am EDT
Uninsured Patients in Massachusetts Still Predominantly the Working Poor, Despite State's Health Reform
Many still find insurance unaffordable and employer-sponsored insurance unavailable, Harvard Medical School researchers say
WASHINGTON
Despite the implementation of the Massachusetts health care reform designed to bolster employer-based insurance and to provide no-cost or low-cost insurance to those unable to afford it, the uninsured in Massachusetts remain predominantly the working poor, according to a new study by researchers at Harvard Medical School just published online in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
The 2006 comprehensive health care reform was designed to achieve "universal coverage" through new laws requiring that employers with more than 10 employees offer insurance and that all state residents obtain insurance or pay a fine. It also provided free or low-cost, subsidized insurance to state residents with low incomes.
Yet, most estimates put the number of uninsured in the state at well above a quarter million. For instance, last week the Census Bureau released its survey which found 370,000 people to be uninsured in Massachusetts -- 5.6 percent of the state's population.
To understand why people remained uninsured after the reform, the study authors surveyed 431 patients, ages 18-64, who were visiting the emergency room of Massachusetts' second largest safety-net hospital.
The researchers found that of the 189 patients without health insurance, two-thirds (65.9 percent) were employed, but only a quarter had access to employer-sponsored insurance. In addition, about one-third (35.2 percent) of uninsured patients reported having lost previous insurance coverage, with the majority of these (51.9 percent) having lost their coverage due to loss of a job or transition from one job to another.
"These findings illustrate that tying insurance to employment can be an unstable mechanism for providing coverage," said the study's lead author, Dr. Rachel Nardin, a neurologist at Cambridge Health Alliance. "We found that employer-based coverage failed the self-employed; those who worked for firms that did not offer insurance, especially small firms exempt from a requirement to offer insurance; and the poor who could not afford employer-sponsored insurance even when it was offered to them. The system of coverage also failed those who lost their job, which is particularly problematic with the current economic downturn."
More than 85 percent of the uninsured patients interviewed had incomes low enough to qualify them for free or low-cost, state-subsidized private insurance. Nonetheless, one-third reported being uninsured because they could not find affordable insurance.
In fact, although the majority of the uninsured were aware of the new legal requirement that they carry health insurance, nearly half reported that it motivated them to try to find insurance but that they had been unable to find insurance they could afford.
Senior author Dr. Danny McCormick, an internist at Cambridge Health Alliance, said: "It appears that for people with very low incomes, even state plans with subsidized insurance premiums may be too costly. Also, under the reform law workers who are offered employer sponsored insurance but decline it due to cost are not eligible for state subsidized insurance, no matter how poor they are."
McCormick added, "If we are serious about the goal of universal coverage, we will need to further reduce or eliminate the financial barriers to getting insurance that still clearly exist in Massachusetts."
The study also found that another common reason for losing previously held insurance was having had it cancelled without notice or because of lapsed paperwork. Only 5.6 percent of the interviewees were uninsured because they didn't think they needed insurance, suggesting there were few seeking a so-called free ride.
"Our study shows the many ways that patients can get left out of a complex system for providing health insurance," said McCormick. "While the reform substantially reduced the number of uninsured in our state, it failed to fully reach the demographic groups it targeted. Our findings emphasize the fragility of a reform requiring voluntary uptake, periodic renewal, dependence on employment and cost-sharing."
The study authors also point out that the Massachusetts health care reform law served as the model for the national health reform law, the Affordable Care Act, and thus may suggest even larger difficulty ahead for national health reform.
Nardin commented: "In Massachusetts, we had about 10 percent uninsured before the reform. In many other states, the uninsured rate is in the 20-25 percent range. If our results are any indicator, the national reform may leave many working poor uncovered.
"Although arguments about political feasibility are a major challenge, our study suggests that a comprehensive reform guaranteeing coverage to all residents without eligibility restrictions -- such as that provided by many single-payer systems -- would be a more effective way to achieve universal coverage than the Massachusetts reform."
"Reasons why patients remain uninsured after Massachusetts' health care reform: A survey of patients at a safety-net hospital," Rachel Nardin, M.D., Assaad Sayah, M.D., Hermione Lokko, B.Sc., Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., and Danny McCormick, M.D., M.P.H. Journal of General Internal Medicine, Sept. 16, 2011.
Physicians for a National Health Program is a single issue organization advocating a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program. PNHP has more than 21,000 members and chapters across the United States.
LATEST NEWS
US Abstains as UN Security Council Demands 'Immediate Cease-Fire' in Gaza
"This resolution must be implemented," said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres. "Failure would be unforgivable."
Mar 25, 2024
The U.S. on Monday declined to veto but still abstained from a United Nations Security Council on Monday to adopt a resolution demanding an "immediate cease-fire for the month of Ramadan" in the embattled Gaza Strip, a move that came amid an ongoing Israeli genocide in which more than 114,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded and hundreds of thousands of others are starving.
The Security Council voted 14-0, with the U.S. abstaining, to approve a resolution for the cessation of hostilities during the Muslim holy month after member states overcame a sticking point over the removal of the word "permanent" from an earlier draft version. Instead, the resolution calls for an "immediate" cease-fire.
The U.S. had vetoed three of the previous four cease-fire resolutions.
"This resolution must be implemented," U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said following Monday's vote. "Failure would be unforgivable."
As the U.N. Newsexplained:
The resolution is a bare-bones call for a cease-fire during the month of Ramadan, which began on March 11. It also demands the return of about 130 hostages seized in Israel and held in Gaza and emphasizes the urgent need to allow ample lifesaving aid to reach a starving population in the besieged enclave.
The demand to end hostilities has so far eluded the council following the Israeli forces' invasion of Gaza in October after Hamas attacks left almost 1,200 dead and 240 taken hostage.
Since then, Israel's daily bombardment alongside its near-total blockade of water, electricity, and lifesaving aid has killed more than 32,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the health ministry there, where a recent U.N.-backed report showed an imminent famine unfolding.
Palestinians—especially children—are starving to death in Gaza. Hospitals are under attack, with Israeli forces reportedly executing large numbers of people inside al-Shifa Hospital.
Meanwhile, the approximately 1.5 milllion Palestinians in the southern city of Rafah—most of them refugees forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza—are bracing for an anticipated ground invasion, which Israeli leaders say will proceed despite a warning from U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris that such an operation would have "consequences."
Monday's vote followed intense negotiations over the measure introduced by 10 non-permanent Security Council members—Algeria, Ecuador, Guyana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Korea, and Switzerland.
The United States—which, despite growing frustration over genocidal atrocities, still arms Israel—brushed off a threat from far-right Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel a planned visit to Washigton by a high-level Israeli delegation if the U.S. did not veto the resolution.
The Associated Pressreported Netanyahu followed through with his threat and canceled the trip.
Human rights defenders welcomed Monday's vote.
"Israel needs to immediately respond to the U.N. Security Council resolution adopted today by facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid, ending its starvation of Gaza's population, and halting unlawful attacks," Louis Charbonneau, director of Human Rights Watch's U.N. program, said in a statement.
"Palestinian armed groups should immediately release all civilians held hostage," he added. "The U.S. and other countries should use their leverage to end atrocities by suspending arms transfers to Israel."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Death Sentence for Thousands': Israel Bars UNRWA Food Aid to Northern Gaza
"By preventing UNRWA to fulfill its mandate in Gaza, the clock will tick faster toward famine and many more will die of hunger, dehydration, and lack of shelter," UNRWA's commissioner-general said.
Mar 25, 2024
Israel will no longer permit the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to drive convoys bearing food aid into northern Gaza, even as the area is on the brink of famine.
Israeli officials informed the U.N. of the new restrictions on Sunday, prompting outrage and dire warnings from U.N. officials and other human rights advocates.
"By preventing UNRWA to fulfill its mandate in Gaza, the clock will tick faster toward famine and many more will die of hunger, dehydration, and lack of shelter," UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini posted on social media. "This cannot happen, it would only stain our collective humanity."
"I have urged Israel to lift all impediments on aid to Gaza. Now this—MORE impediments."
In his response, Lazzarini said that UNRWA was the largest organization operating in Gaza with the greatest capability to distribute aid.
"This is outrageous and makes it intentional to obstruct lifesaving assistance during a man-made famine," Lazzarini said. "These restrictions must be lifted."
The news comes as medical workers and international aid organizations have sounded the alarm about famine in Gaza. At least 23 children in northern Gaza have already died from starvation or dehydration, and one-third of children under two years old suffer from acute malnutrition, according to the United Nations' International Children's Emergency Fund. A new Integrated Food Security Phase Classification report published on March 18 found that famine was "imminent" in Gaza's northern governorates and likely to begin "anytime" between the report's publication and May. In the northern governorates, where around 300,000 live, almost two-thirds of households endured at least 10 days and nights when they did not eat at all in the last 30 days.
"Blocking UNRWA from delivering food is in fact denying starving people the ability to survive," World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on social media. "This decision must be urgently reversed. The levels of hunger are acute. All efforts to deliver food should not only be permitted but there should be an immediate acceleration of food deliveries."
U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Martin Griffiths also called for Israel's decision to be "revoked."
"I have urged Israel to lift all impediments on aid to Gaza. Now this—MORE impediments," Griffiths posted on social media, calling UNRWA the "beating heart of the humanitarian response in Gaza."
UNRWA Communications Director Juliette Touma toldBBC World on Monday that a quarter of a million people in the north rely on UNRWA food aid, yet the agency has not been able to deliver to them in two months. An attempt on February 5 had to turn back after the Israeli Navy fired on an aid convoy even as it traveled along a pre-approved route.
Touma told BBC World that more than 1 million people in Gaza now live in UNRWA shelters.
"They lost everything, and they need everything," Touma said.
Touma added that the most important commodity people in Gaza need is food, but they also need "safety, and they need protection, above all, and a cease-fire, which is very, very much overdue."
The U.N. Security Council finally succeeded in passing a resolution on Monday calling for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza and the release of all hostages as the U.S. abstained from the vote.
Outside the U.N., former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth said on social media that the food aid decision showed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's "starvation strategy at work," as well as his "vendetta against Palestinian refugees."
CEO of Medical Aid for Palestinians Melanie Ward also decried Israel's decision to permanently block UNRWA convoys from the north.
"This would be a death sentence for thousands," Ward said on social media. "They cannot be allowed to do this."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Law Is the Law': EU Investigates Apple, Google, Meta for Anti-Monopoly Violations
"the days of these tech giants exploiting monopoly positions in different markets are over," said one expert.
Mar 25, 2024
The European Commission signaled Monday that it has no intention of waiting for powerful tech companies to change their practices in order to comply with a landmark anti-monopoly law passed by the European Union earlier this month, as officials informed Apple, Facebook parent company Meta, and Google parent company Alphabet that they were being investigated for potential violations.
"The law is the law," Thierry Breton, E.U. commissioner for internal market, told reporters at a press conference in Brussels announcing the probe. "We can't just sit around and wait."
The commission told the tech giants it is investigating whether Apple and Alphabet are complying with the Digital Markets Act's (DMA) measure requiring companies to allow users to be directed to offers available outside the firms' own app stores. The two companies may be imposing "various restrictions and limitations" on users to unfairly favor their own stores, including by charging fees to prevent apps from promoting offers outside the Apple and Google app stores.
The commission is investigating Meta's practice of allowing users to pay a monthly fee for ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram, which allow them to avoid having their personal data used for ad-targeting.
"The commission is concerned that the binary choice imposed by Meta's 'pay or consent' model may not provide a real alternative in case users do not consent, thereby not achieving the objective of preventing the accumulation of personal data by gatekeepers," said the European Commission.
Margrethe Vestager, executive vice president of the commission, said in Brussels that the companies have announced some steps to comply with the DMA, which took effect on March 7, but that some of the measures "fail to achieve their objectives and fall short of expectations."
Compliance "is something that we take very seriously," said Vestager.
The DMA identifies Alphabet, Apple, and Meta as three of six digital "gatekeepers" that are required to end anti-competition practices. New regulations require the companies to allow third parties to operate with the gatekeepers' own services, allow business users to access the data they generate when using the companies' platforms, allow users to un-install any pre-installed software or app if they choose to, and treat their own services and products equally to those offered by third parties.
The commission has 12 months to complete the investigations and could fine the multibillion-dollar companies up to 10% of their global revenue if they find them to be in violation of the DMA.
John O'Brennan, professor of European politics at Maynooth University in Ireland, said the investigation signals that "the days of these tech giants exploiting monopoly positions in different markets are over."
The E.U. fined Apple $1.8 billion earlier this month for suppressing competition from rival music streaming apps such as Spotify. The company is also under scrutiny in the U.S., with the Department of Justice joining 16 states last week in filing a lawsuit accusing Apple of illegally monopolizing the smartphone market.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular