Vol. 73/No. 28      July 27, 2009

The bills being circulated in the Senate and House of Representatives would make it mandatory for people to buy health insurance—either from private companies or from a government-sponsored plan. There would be stiff fines and penalties for those who don’t sign up. None of the proposals would provide coverage for undocumented workers.

A Senate bill would impose fines of more than $1,000 for individuals not having health insurance, and even higher amounts for families.

Workers who do buy insurance would face not only premiums but large copayments and deductibles. An “essential benefits package” that includes hospitalization and doctor visits under a “low-cost” plan would cover only 65 percent of costs on average. The House of Representatives is discussing a plan to cap annual copayment and deductible costs at $11,600 for families and $5,800 for individuals.

In 2006 the state of Massachusetts adopted a law requiring mandatory health insurance coverage. Since then the uninsured rate dropped from about 6 percent to 2.6 percent. “Many of the newly ‘insured’ still can’t purchase even basic medical services,” stated a July 6 article in the Washington Examiner. “Over the last 12 months, about 10 percent of state residents failed to fill a prescription, missed a payment on a medical bill, or skipped essential medical care.”

The Obama administration has pledged that most of the cost of implementing a “health reform” package will be covered through substantial cuts in current health-care spending. About two-thirds of the $948 billion in “savings” the president has proposed over 10 years “would come from a range of reductions in projected Medicare spending,” noted the New York Times. Towards this end, hospital associations have announced a deal that cuts government Medicare and Medicaid payments by $155 billion over the next decade.

The Senate Finance Committee has suggested cutting Medicare payments in areas where per-beneficiary spending is above the average spent nationwide. Among the arguments put forward for such cuts is that they are needed to reduce “excessive use of medical care” and that expensive medical procedures must be “cost-effective.”

“As much as 30 percent of all health-care spending in this country—some $700 billion a year—may be wasted on tests and treatments that do not improve the health of the recipients,” argued the Times in a July 7 editorial.

Other proposals legislators are considering are to tax employee health benefits and to raise taxes on sugared soft drinks, tobacco products, and alcoholic beverages.

Limited government subsidies could be provided to some workers to purchase insurance premiums. The House of Representatives is also discussing slightly expanding the number of people eligible for Medicaid to cover individuals with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level ($14,404).

President Obama has said that he’s for a government-run insurance plan to compete alongside private insurers. But he’s not arguing for a single-payer system run by the government. He told a town-hall meeting in Annandale, Virginia, July 1 that such a move “could be hugely disruptive.”

There are about 46 million people without health insurance in the United States, reports the Census Bureau. Of these some 18,000 die each year because of lack of available health care, according to a recent study by the Institute of Medicine.
 
 
Related articles:
Unions in California protest cuts in services  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home