|
 |
Health Insurance
Serving Individuals, Families,
Businesses & Groups Nationwide.
|
|
Health Insurance
|
Home
| Schwarzenegger Seeks to Curtail California Individ... »
| Affordable Health Insurance Has Pros and Cons »
| Affordable Health Insurance Still Hard to Find, bu... »
| Should Health Insurance Be Based on Lifestyle Choi... »
| Small Business Health Insurance in Maryland Gets B... »
| Massachusetts Health Insurance Plugs On »
| New Florida Health Insurance Plan Faces Challenges... »
| Lacking Government Insurance Assistance Hurts Cali... »
| Politics Getting Serious About Individual Health I... »
| Obama Proposes Tax Cuts for Small Business Health... »
There's been talk in the past of regulating health insurance costs by forcing people who make unhealthy lifestyle decisions to pay more. Now, in at least one county, it's coming into effect. NorthEscambia.com reports that in order to save on health insurance costs, employees of the county in Escambia, Florida will not be hired at all if the smoke. This move is, of course, more aggressive than simply charging more or higher health insurance premiums for smokers, but it's not surprising. Smokers cost the country roughly $92 billion dollars a year, and good portion of that is in health care costs. And smoking isn't the only health culprit under examination. In California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has suggested that people who keep their weight, cholesterol, and blood pressure low should pay less than those who don't. Opponents argue that such rules amount to discrimination, and that obesity and other health related problems aren't a simple matter of lifestyle decision-making. But supporters argue that health insurance premiums are raised for all Americans by those who don't make healthy lifestyle decisions. Either way, this argument adds a new dimension to the debate regarding health care in America, and how to best provide medical services to all.
Across the country, high premiums for small business health insurance have made it difficult (if not impossible) for many employers to offer coverage to their employees. The result? Those employers who can't afford small business health insurance don't have the ability to lure good employees like bigger companies can, and whether it's injured employees or better offers from competitors, turnover is higher for those small businesses. In Maryland, however, the Maryland Health Care Commission is offering to lend a hand to some employers in a bind. According to the Washington Post, beginning October 1st subsidies for small business health insurance will be available to small businesses with between 2 and 9 employees. The total amount to be spent for the subsidies is around $15 million, but because the funding will operate on a "first-come, first-served" basis, it's important for employers to be very proactive if they want to take advantage of this opportunity. And with 800,000 Marylanders lacking health insurance, there will be a lot of employers lining up to offer the coverage that not only draws the best employees, but keeps them in the business for the long term.
As NPR calls it, Massachusetts health insurance is the "most closely watched experiment in U.S. health care" today. But it's not an experiment without problems. Sure, enrollment in the new Massachusetts health insurance plan, which requires all adults over age 18 be covered, has reported high enrollment and statewide consumer satisfaction. Most of the newly enrolled are poor or near-poor, and problems with medical debt and unmet health care needs have declined. But it's not cheap. Due to this very success the Massachusetts health insurance bill is running at hundreds of millions of dollars higher than expected. In some cases people are struggling to get appointment with doctors, to deal with bureaucratic red tape, and more. And through it all, the biggest challenge seems to be forcing young people to sign up. But if it works, Massachusetts health insurance plan will work on a grand scale, since much of the nation sees their experiment as a potential blueprint for the rest of the country. Which also means that failure of the plan could have large-scale national implications for health care today and how it should be regulated.
Governor Charlie Crist's Florida health insurance plan, known as Cover Florida, may not be as successful as he had hoped. Cover Florida was passed in May and was designed to offer some form of Florida health insurance to many of the state's 3.7 million uninsured citizens. But the Orlando Sentinel reports that the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonprofit policy-research group in Washington, D.C., doesn't believe that Cover Florida is going to work. The plan has two problems that the report suggests will make it unlikely that many Florida citizens will opt for the coverage. First, Cover Florida is designed to offer "bare bones" plans to low-income people. But bare-bones plans also come with high deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs that make it difficult for residents to pay for treatments. And even at that, Crist's Florida health insurance plan still comes in (at its cheapest) at $150 a month, much too much for most low-income residents to afford. The writers of the report suggest that Florida should subsidize coverage for those who can't afford it, and offer plans that don't feature high costs and fees that still make it impossible to enjoy health coverage.
Nearly one in five Californians are without insurance coverage, even though many are steadily employed. This is a dangerous statistic considering California ranks lowest in government medical assistance and reimbursement, according to The Wall Street Journal. So what happens when those 19% uninsured get sick or injured and must get medical attention? In California, you can't expect Medicaid to cover much; they offer less than three thousand a year per person in coverage to those that meet their eligibility requirements. That would only cover a single overnight hospital stay, with nothing left in the budget for lab work, imaging, or prescriptions. And since the California government reimburses so little to physicians, these practices and clinics are forced to raise their rates or turn away Medicaid and uninsured patients, effectively kicking them when they are down. Some people playing the game of insurance roulette have found themselves facing economic disaster when the unexpected happens. A prolonged illness or serious accident could cost families hundreds of thousands of dollars- both financially and emotionally devastating. Imagine losing your home, your savings, and your security while battling cancer or recovering from pneumonia. And what about something seemingly small like a broken bone that needs a little extra attention? Expenses for the "little things" really can stack up in a hurry. Individual health insurance shouldn't be considered a luxury expense, it's a necessity. No one can predict an accident or illness, so why should anyone go without the financial protection afforded by health insurance? Who can afford not to have health insurance these days?
As November draws closer and closer, it isn't just the presidential hopefuls that are addressing health care, and the potential for a new form of individual health insurance in the future. The Center for American Progress recently released an article about health care titled "Six Conservative Myths About Health Care" seeking to discredit some of the ideas and perceptions regarding individual health insurance in America traditionally espoused by more conservative legislators. The points they address include some such as, "health reform is best left to individual states," as well as the notion of a flat tax for all Americans to purchase individual health insurance, and the idea that "consumer-driven health plans" will lead to more choices and higher quality of care. Issues of prevention are also addressed, specifically since those people who must rely on emergency care don't enjoy the benefits of disease prevention as they theoretically would if they could have doctor's appointments on a regular basis. The goal of the article is to support a federally regulated national health insurance plan that would lower premiums, maintain quality of care, and save America some money in overall health care costs. How more conservative op-eds will respond should be interesting, and will hopefully generate much needed debate regarding the best means of improving our broken health care system.
With much of the current health care debate revolving around individual coverage, it's easy to see why so many employers are concerned about the future of small business health insurance. But one candidate has addressed the topic in a recent speech. According to Kaiser's Daily Health Policy Report Democratic nominee Barack Obama discussed tax credits for those employers who purchase small business health insurance for their employees. Under his proposal, small businesses would receive a refundable tax credit equal to about 50% of insurance premiums for employees. The small business health insurance offered would need to be of good quality and cover a "meaningful" share of costs to qualify, but could still go a long way in helping small business owners offer coverage without endangering their businesses. The cost would run about $6 billion a year, and Obama suggests it would be paid for by allowing market entry of more generic drugs and through other savings he predicts will come out of his revised health plan. Of course getting pharmaceutical companies to give up some of their profits wouldn't be an easy task. However, we can only hope that Obama's proposal means that small business health insurance won't be forgotten in the health care shuffle of 2009.
With health care topping the list among voters' concerns for November, a new coalition has formed to make sure that whoever ends up in the White House doesn't somehow "forget" to focus on affordable health insurance. Too often promises made on the campaign trail fall by the wayside once that candidate finds their way into political office. But according to an article at RedOrbit.com, a coalition of "unions, think tanks , and other groups" intend to spend a considerable amount of time and money ensuring that some form of affordable health insurance comes out of the 2009 elections. Health Care for America Now has situated itself on Washington's infamous "K" Street, where aggressive lobbyists set up camp. Their main claim is that the government should guarantee all Americans some form of affordable health insurance, whether it be public or private, as a "basic, fundamental right." They want to force regulation upon the insurance industry, controlling things like how much a company can charge for deductibles, not allowing discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, and disallowing the dropping of coverage when someone gets sick. They plan to spend $1.5 million to campaign and advertise, with the ultimate goal of $40 million. It's good to see that public participation in the health care system is taking on a grass-roots type of organization -these kinds of movements tend to get things done, and with luck there will be some kind of affordable health insurance plan available to all American citizens in the near future.
Now that there are only two presidential contenders for November elections, it would seem that issues like health insurance costs, social security, and health care in general would be clearer-cut and easier to understand. Then again, maybe not. On the one hand, a recent article at Reuters does a good job of outlining the bare-bones arguments that both Obama and McCain have made regarding health care costs, employer based health insurance, and social security. But the bare-bones version doesn't include any of the concerns and questions that swirl around each candidate. For example, McCain endorses an end to tax breaks for employer-provided health insurance, with refundable tax credits for those individuals who purchase a policy. But what if they don't? Too many people already opt out of insurance coverage, and it's those people who burden the health care system when they get sick, get emergency treatment, and then can't pay. And Obama has proposed a national health insurance program that would reduce the exposure of employer plans to the costs of catastrophic illness. But then the question arises, who exactly will pay for those costs? Will those people with pre-existing conditions continue to be denied coverage under such a plan? The questions could go on - how do we trim spending and preserve Social Security? How do we protect children and older Americans who can't afford coverage? What about prescription drug prices, and how many medications will be available to average Americans? Health care in America is a mess right now, and it's no simple issue to be handled with a sound-byte. Hopefully, each candidate will carefully and clearly explain his position on this major U.S. issue before it comes time for us to cast our votes.
Small business health insurance has been the #1 concern for employers in the last 20 years, so it comes as no surprise that the trend continues on. But now, as rising fuel prices squeeze these same employers, many small businesses are being forced to either stop offering any form of small business health insurance, or close their doors for good. According to the Small Business Problems and Priorities survey cited at The Baltimore Business Journal, employers have been struggling to offer their employees health coverage for 20 years. And, as the costs of small business health insurance continue to rise much faster than the rate of inflation, health care is a problem that isn't going to go away any time soon. But now, 42.3% of business owners also cite fuel costs as a problem of "critical concern." As the costs of propane, gasoline and diesel oil go up and beyond record levels, it's the smaller companies with slimmer margins who really feel the effects. Is it any wonder, then, that in the last several years small business health insurance has been waning in popularity. Fewer and fewer employers can offer it at all, and when they do it's rare that such coverage can be expanded to include more services, or family members. We're used to thinking that rising gas prices might mean fewer vacation plans or more carpooling, but for small business owners, it can mean losing good employees who go on to bigger businesses with more health care options, it can mean charging more for services that buyers might go elsewhere to find, and it can even mean the end to a hard-earned business itself.
|
|
