Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
How the American Healthcare System Got That Way
As Americans respond to President-elect Obama call for town hall meetings on reform the American health care system, an understanding of how that system came to be the way it is can be crucial for figuring out how to fix it.
The American health care system is unique because for most of us it is tied to our jobs rather than to our government. For many Americans the system seems natural, but few know that it originated, not as a well thought out plan to provide for Americans' health, but as a way to circumvent a quirk in wartime wage regulations that had nothing to do with health.
As far back as the 1920s, a few big employers had offered health insurance plans to some of their workers. But only a few: By 1935, only about two million people were covered by private health insurance, and on the eve of World War II there were only 48 job-based health plans in the entire country.
The rise of unions in the 1930s and 1940s led to the first great expansion of health care for Americans. But ironically, it did not produce a national plan providing health care to all like those in virtually all other developed countries. Instead, the special conditions of World War II produced the system of job-based health benefits we know today.
In 1942 the U.S. set up a National War Labor Board. It had the power to set a cap on all wage increases. But it let employers circumvent the cap by offering "fringe benefits" -- notably health insurance. The fringe benefits received a huge tax subsidy; they were treated as tax deductible expenses for corporations but not as taxable income for workers.
The result was revolutionary. Companies and unions quickly negotiated new health insurance plans. Some were run by Blue Cross, Blue Shield, and private insurance companies. Others were "Taft-Hartley funds" run jointly by management and unions. By 1950, half of all companies with less than 250 workers and two-thirds of all companies with more than 250 workers offered health insurance of one kind or another. By 1965, nearly three-quarters of the population were covered by some kind of private health insurance.
This private, job-based insurance covered millions of workers who had never had health care insurance before. But this victory also set patterns that are responsible for many of the problems the health care system faces today.
Because this private system was tied to employment, it did not provide health insurance for all. Millions of people outside the workforce were without coverage. Those most likely to be covered were salaried or unionized white men in northern industrial states. Two-thirds of those with incomes under $2,000 a year were not covered; so were nearly half of nonwhites and those over 65.
Employer-based plans tied workers to their jobs - something that benefited employers, but not workers or the economy as a whole. The quality of the coverage was spotty - some plans were excellent, others completely inadequate. Doctors accepted this revolution because it didn't challenge their power; but as a result the system provided no public control over medical costs.
This revolution had a subtle political effect as well. By giving much of the workforce health benefits, it reduced the incentive for them to pursue a system of universal care. And it gave unions a stake in the private, employer-based health care system. As one opponent of publicly financed health care put it, "the greatest bulwark" against "the socialization of medicine" was "furthering the progress already made by voluntary health insurance plans."
Since then, many layers have been laid on top of employer-based health care. Medicare and Medicaid provided government-funded health insurance for the elderly and impoverished. The "managed care revolution" led to the takeover of 90 percent of employer-based health care by HMOs, most of them driven by profit rather than health concerns. But most people continue to get their health care through their employer.
Many of the problems of American health care grow out of this history. The system is so complex that even experts - let alone ordinary people trying to find care for themselves and their loved ones -- are unable to fully understand it. The system spends one-third of its cost on paperwork, waste, and profit over and above the cost of actually providing health care. Yet nearly one-third of Americans are without health insurance over the course of a year. In all other developed countries, more than 85% of citizens have health coverage under public programs. The American health care system is full of inequalities: People who work for one company may have high quality insurance while those who work for a similar company have none.
All of these problems are due at least in part to an employer-based system whose original intent was not to provide quality health care to all, but to circumvent wartime wage regulations. As we begin to debate how to reform health care, we should keep in mind that the American health care system was not created to express American values or to meet Americans' health care needs. And knowing that, we should not be afraid to change the system if we can come up with a better one.
This piece is excerpted from DOCTOR WALL STREET: HOW THE AMERICAN
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM GOT SO SICK, from a popular pamphlet on the history
of the American healthcare system available for free download at http://laborstrategies.blogs.
- Posted in

13 Comments so far
Show AllA really nice article showing how we got here and why we should go to single payer national health without delay. Why comtinue to waste more than a third of our money and produce no health care at all for it.
A third should more than pay for those without insurance I'd say. Time to demand rather than ask.
The American healthcare system is a victim of Friedmanite capitalist extremism. The goal is economic growth at all cost, for upward wealth redistribution, empire expansion, and world domination by a handful of elites. What you see is a manifestation of that quest. The waste and inefficiency very specifically serves to maintain a high volume of economic activity while keeping the people ignorant and powerless. The goal is not maximum value and benefit to the people. The goal is to maximize economic activity for the benefit of elites.
rtdrury
Good comments. But I believe its getteing closer to the time when we need to say to the elites, their syncophants, the fools that believe their propaganda, their hirelings to .....Can't say this any other way, my apologies...go screw themselves when it comes to education, the economy, our armed forces, our healthcare, our government, our children and a few other odds and ends.
He didn't bother to note that HMOs were created by a Democratic Congress and a Republican president (Nixon). Our health care system is basically a gov't creation. There is nothing free market about it.
Health care costs would plummet if doctors who practiced alternative medicine were not persecuted by local Medical Societies and if all M.D.s adopted a preventive/alternative approach, esp evaluating for gut pH, allergies and "subclinical" nutritional problems (e.g. vitamin D). As far as I can tell the proposed system will destroy alternative medicine, our only real hope for health care affordability.
In East Tennessee, horrifying patient care http://www.wisecountyissues.com is perfectly acceptable standards of health care. The health care system in East Tennessee seems to put Profit Care ahead of Patient Care.
One major obstacle to reorganizing our so-called Health Care System is the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA); federal legislation which must be repealed as soon as possible. Failing to identify this obstacle and its critical role in maintaining the status quo threatens effective and meaningful change.
Those posters who believe, as I do, that elites benefit from the current dysfunctional system know how difficult it will be to move forward without change being superfically repackaged as another money-making scheme by elites for elites. Stay vigilant and don't settle for window dressing!
The existence of for-profit insurance companies is a symptom of a sick society.
Roger that.
The real problem is the USA has no health care system but a non system. It has a 1000 systems that are run by the private health insurance companies for their benefit and profit and not for the health of the people. No other industrial nation tolerates this.
AD
The real problem is the USA has no health care system but a non system. It has a 1000 systems that are run by the private health insurance companies for their benefit and profit and not for the health of the people. No other industrial nation tolerates this.
AD
The authors could have compared and contrasted our system with the UK. I heard that their current National Health Service evolved out of a military health care system which was, by necessity, extended to all civilians during and after the Battle of Britain.
Under the Fabian-influenced government after the war, they decided to keep the NHS in place. As a system of fully-socialized healthcare, it works well to this day.
Any problems can be attributed to the usual right-wing cynical strategy of de-funding the program to the point that quality suffers, telling the people: "See? Socialistic public [healthcare, schools, utilities, transit, etc, etc] doesn't work"; then, propose "free market" privatization, which cost the public more in the end.
Also, a point not made in this article is how the US employer based healthcare system has the very useful effect of making US workers much more fearful of losing their jobs - thereby depressing wages - probably enough to pay for the employer's cost for group plans.
---USAn---
So why don't people nail their local and state level pols and make them push for a better healthcare system? Sure, the feds will go out of their way to pre-emptively strike us down just like the Bush gang did the last 8 years but are we gonna just sit there and let the monied crooks screw us? The corporatized healthcare mess started from local levels and made their way up to state levels and then national. Even today, like the NRA (National Rifle Association), they still fight for their power on all levels and know that people won't fight on the local and state levels where it can really make a difference. Let's get back to nailing our local and state level reps and force the giants on the defensive by forcing them to spend more money to defend themselves. Who's ready to fight on all levels and be a winner ?
And by the way, unions came to power through communities and unity first and they never focused on money but on real labor and pride unlike today's unions which are too weak, dysfunctional, and soaked with corrupt leadership snatching money just to lobby. The unions of the 1930s didn't use money but love and unity to fight. Unions are like married couples. When the man and woman are divided, others easily break up their relationships but when they're united, it's tough love against their wannabe dividers ! It's time to put the money aside and bring back the real value of labor unions to the table. Even us folks in the Deep South would welcome it. Trust me.
Let's not forget that in earlier decades, healthcare (except for catastrophic, maybe) was not all that expensive. Most small towns had at least one doctor, and probably a small hospital - which most people could afford. With the profit incentive added by employer-paid health plans, somebody else had to pay the difference - and that was the poor guy without employer-based healthcare. Even now, patients are charged three times as much if they are not in some 'plan' - usually those who can least afford it, with falling wages.
Also, 'expensive' items, such as MRIs and CAT-scans are cheaper in countries with national healthcare - and much more readily available. It's a rip-off of gigantic proportions - if most people knew the truth, they'd revolt. This scam is even worse than the high drug prices we pay! And of course, a lot of Americans believe the propaganda that 'we have the best healthcare in the world' - wish is patently untrue, of course. I've met intelligent professionals who swallow this hogwash and parrot it - disgusting.
The other rip-off is the poor pay many doctors and nurses now get - corporate hospitals and clinics can 'import' replacements at a much lower cost. This has to stop - but we have to lower the price of medical/nursing school and pay ALL doctors a living wage. They're not all rich these days, and nurses never got what they deserved in pay - there aren't enough RNs to staff most clinics now, and many PAs take the place of doctors in small-town part-time clinics. This sure isn't 'the best healthcare in the world' by a long shot. And then there is the problem of hospital stays being too short for patients to recover completely - another 'cost-saving' innovation of our corporate healthcare system that is costing lives and encumbering families with home-care that was once provided in a hospital.
Getting the criminals/racketeers/profiteers out of the healthcare system will be difficult - but it is necessary, if we are to survive as a healthy society - which we are NOT!!!
Removing the profit motive will cause changes in other areas - drug research and medical research is largely funded by OUR tax dollars - but private firms reap the profits. Making profits by withholding healthcare from some people is immoral - but what do you expect from a country that has corporations making a profit by torturing people? We need to reorganize our priorities - and not take 'No' for an answer. And we need to examine the morals of this country - our government - and make serious changes, while we still can.