Health costs talk is crucial
Sun, Jul. 25, 2004
Health costs talk is crucial
States need incentives to try policy changes
Mercury News Editorial
Crisis doesn’t begin to describe the extent of America’s health care problem.
The nation’s economic future is being threatened by a system that is drowning America’s employers and its workers in a sea of rising insurance premium costs.
California’s business and labor unions should join forces to find common ground and demand a national conversation about health care reforms. Now.
Health care alternatives exist, ranging from the relatively simple — revamping our employer-based system — to the more radical, such as instituting a single-payer or voucher system.
Congress should be pushed to provide incentives for states to experiment with policy changes to see whether they would be effective at a national level.
The problem isn’t a lack of funding — America spends $1.6 trillion a year on health care. That’s 50 percent more per capita than the second-highest spending country, Switzerland.
Yet the health of the average American is worse than that of citizens in any of the major industrialized nations. Americans’ life expectancy has slipped to 24th in the world after topping the rankings three decades ago. The World Health organization now ranks the United States 37th in the world in overall health system performance, sandwiched between Costa Rica and Slovenia. Those low rankings are in large part due to the fact that 44 million Americans — many of them workers — have no health care insurance. As a result, inability to pay medical expenses is expected to soon become the leading cause of bankruptcy in America.
President Bush’s solution is underwhelming, at best. He proposes to cut the number of uninsured by roughly 10 percent by providing tax credits and personal savings accounts to the uninsured.
Democratic challenger John Kerry’s proposal is more ambitious. He advocates eliminating Bush’s tax cuts for households with an income of $200,000 or more and use those savings to fund coverage for an additional 27 million people. But his plan will have a difficult time passing Congress, if Republicans retain control.
Neither candidate puts enough emphasis on bringing down costs.
One way to accomplish that goal is to adopt a universal health care system. Many Californians are unaware that Sen. Sheila Kuehl’s single-payer bill — SB 921 — has passed the state Assembly and is pending in the state Senate. The thrust of her argument is that the United States wastes nearly 20 percent of its health care dollars — $300 billion annually — on health care administrative costs. In contrast, administrative costs account for only 2.1 percent of Medicare’s budget.
But universal health care contains its own set of unknowns. Oregon voters in 2002 voted down a single-payer initiative over fears that taxes would go through the roof and that rationing of certain medical procedures (a recurring criticism of Canada’s single-payer system) would ultimately become a fact of life. California would need further assurances on both fronts before making that leap of faith.
Kuehl gets high marks for having the courage to move the health care conversation forward.
Those who remain on the sidelines have themselves to blame if health care premiums jump another 14 percent next year and if costs continue to rise four times faster than wages.