In healthcare reform one of the key provisions must be, in my opinion, universal coverage. That means, you MUST have health insurance; it is not an option, penalties to be worked out later.
Right now Hillary and Edwards agree, Obama says mandate it only for kids the rest voluntarily. On the Republican side, none of them are for universal coverage with McCain being the most vocal AGAINST mandated coverage. Mitt Romney, while governor of Massachusetts, established mandatory coverage but now is against his own plan?
One of the main reasons for having universal coverage is to eliminate the “uninsured”. The uninsured are the people most responsible for the dramatic rise in health care costs. Because hospitals are mandated by law to treat the uninsured (pro bono) they jack up the prices for their medical services to those of us with insurance and in so doing, allow us to pay the uninsured person’s medical bills.
It stands to reason that if we eliminated the uninsured medical facilities would not need to keep raising their costs; they are no longer treating people for free – get it?
You may ask who are the uninsured (40+ million) and how will they be able to buy insurance?
As to who they are is a complicated question but there are surveys available. Many are young people (men) that think they will never get sick, others would rather get free coverage at the ER and some are working poor that don’t qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford the expensive policies available to them currently.
One obvious answer is to make available many insurance policies, prices according to the extent of coverage and co-pays. This will enable the young guy to buy just catastrophic coverage for cheap. Right now, states like Michigan mandate what an insurance policy MUST cover and since they MUST cover basically everything, their cost is astronomical and therefore out of reach to the working poor. The absurdity of such laws becomes apparent when the 19 year old single male has to have a policy covering maternity services.
Subsidies will be available for people needing help with their premiums. I mentioned that employers not offering healthcare coverage would pay into a pool or trust fund that would use that money for subsidizing the working poor. Remember I am only talking about the current uninsured; the poor will continue to have Medicaid and the elderly Medicare.
The Republicans are saying that forcing people to get health coverage is a little un-American but they don’t mind forcing people to have auto coverage? What’s the difference? Obviously you cannot depend on people to do the right thing so you force them Herr Hoffmann!!!
Right now Hillary and Edwards agree, Obama says mandate it only for kids the rest voluntarily. On the Republican side, none of them are for universal coverage with McCain being the most vocal AGAINST mandated coverage. Mitt Romney, while governor of Massachusetts, established mandatory coverage but now is against his own plan?
One of the main reasons for having universal coverage is to eliminate the “uninsured”. The uninsured are the people most responsible for the dramatic rise in health care costs. Because hospitals are mandated by law to treat the uninsured (pro bono) they jack up the prices for their medical services to those of us with insurance and in so doing, allow us to pay the uninsured person’s medical bills.
It stands to reason that if we eliminated the uninsured medical facilities would not need to keep raising their costs; they are no longer treating people for free – get it?
You may ask who are the uninsured (40+ million) and how will they be able to buy insurance?
As to who they are is a complicated question but there are surveys available. Many are young people (men) that think they will never get sick, others would rather get free coverage at the ER and some are working poor that don’t qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford the expensive policies available to them currently.
One obvious answer is to make available many insurance policies, prices according to the extent of coverage and co-pays. This will enable the young guy to buy just catastrophic coverage for cheap. Right now, states like Michigan mandate what an insurance policy MUST cover and since they MUST cover basically everything, their cost is astronomical and therefore out of reach to the working poor. The absurdity of such laws becomes apparent when the 19 year old single male has to have a policy covering maternity services.
Subsidies will be available for people needing help with their premiums. I mentioned that employers not offering healthcare coverage would pay into a pool or trust fund that would use that money for subsidizing the working poor. Remember I am only talking about the current uninsured; the poor will continue to have Medicaid and the elderly Medicare.
The Republicans are saying that forcing people to get health coverage is a little un-American but they don’t mind forcing people to have auto coverage? What’s the difference? Obviously you cannot depend on people to do the right thing so you force them Herr Hoffmann!!!
We have neighbors who work hard but have jobs without health insurance. I found a prescription discount card that they could use to save on the price of their meds at the drugstore. It’s at www.rxdrugcard.com. The monthly family membership fee is only $4.95 and drug prices are on the website to check before joining.
ReplyDelete