Single-payer system would bring windfall for businesses
By Jack Lohman, for SBTHow many more uninsured Wisconsinites must die before our politicians get out of the pockets of the insurance industry and fix our health care crisis?
Sorry to be so blunt, but that is exactly what is happening today. Over $1.4 million per year in campaign contributions flows from the health care and insurance industries that want to keep the status quo. Inefficiency breeds profits, and they want the profits to continue.
Hundreds of thousands in campaign dollars come from the banking and credit card industries that benefit from health savings accounts – that incidentally are great for wealthy investors but terrible for patients and families in need of care. Worse, HSAs (health savings accounts) will ultimately help drive up health care costs as they keep patients away from care until it is more expensive to treat or becomes untreatable. Be careful of what you wish for.
A million more in campaign dollars from the bankruptcy attorneys that also like things just as they are, with over half of all bankruptcies involving exorbitant health care debt.
And all of this because campaign contributors are willing to share their profits with the politicians that make it all happen, and the pols that are willing to oblige. What a wonderful world.
Will it ever end?
Not just the deadly health care crisis, but also the political corruption that sustains it. When are politicians going to say enough is enough, and do what is right for the public?
A single-payer health care system would be a windfall for businesses, the state’s economy and our citizens. Perhaps the insurance companies will have to make their profits elsewhere, as will the bankruptcy attorneys, bankers and credit card companies. But with a stronger Wisconsin economy there will be plenty of opportunity for that.
We now have three health care proposals, all designed to satisfy a certain constituency. But only one is aimed toward all citizens and away from the insurance bureaucracy that is consuming 31 percent of health care dollars without ever spending a penny on direct health care.
Sometimes you have to spend money to make money, and that’s exactly what Sen. Mark Miller (D-Monona) and Rep. Chuck Benedict (D-Beloit) do with the Health Security Act (SB51/AB94). A small additional payroll tax for employers eliminates the 10 to 15 percent they currently spend on health care benefits, and a small additional payroll tax for employees eliminates costs of co-pays, deductibles, dental, vision, and scores of other expenses.
This should be called the Improved Medicare-For-All system, because it’s modeled after Medicare, the only part of our health care system that does function efficiently. Yes, Medicare currently costs more per capita, because it covers almost exclusively seniors and end-of-lifers. But fold in the younger, healthier population and the average becomes lower than our current system. U.S. Rep. John Conyers’ proposed HR676 at the federal level does the same.
If you are hung up over the government’s involvement, get over it. There are some things best left to the government to fund. Fire and police protection, building public roads, and funding health care are just a few. Political campaigns are another, but that’s a story for a different day.
Or maybe not. If you pay taxes you experience on a daily basis the costs of privately funded campaigns. Outrageous health care is just one of them.
Where are the non-health care business leaders on this? Many with their heads in the sand. They are trying to reduce costs in this so-called “free market” system, all while turning their heads when their fellow health care businesses pick their pocket. Their business associations that claim both as members, are siding with the insurers and actually selling their insurance to members.
Where’s Business Ethics 101 when you really need it?
Don’t buy the mistruths about the Canadian system
By Jon Rauser, for SBTI have been invited to respond to calls for a single payer health system as envisioned by Sen. Mark Miller’s Wisconsin Health Security Act (SB 51). Thank you for the opportunity but real debate of a complex issue cannot be confined to a 650 word column or one of the many 20-minute forums the Miller camp has staged throughout the state in recent months. I will do what I can in the space allowed.
Full disclosure: I am an independent health insurance broker. Along with 20,000 members of the National Association of Health Underwriters, my peers and I help more than 100 million Americans afford the expensive miracles performed every day by health care professionals. I know quite a lot about the financing of health care; I know very little about the delivery of health care.
Those that advocate for a government-run health system postulate eliminating insurers’ egregious profits and wasteful administrative costs will more than offset the cost of bringing some 45 million uninsured into a mandatory one size fits all system. Rubbish!
As reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), private health insurance administrative costs nationwide average 14.1 percent of premiums paid; factoring out taxes and other assessments, the figure drops to 9.9 percent – not the 30 percent or more often cited. A related observation: when I quote comparable health plans with a Wisconsin-based not-for-profit insurer, they are often the same or a little higher than those of the largest for-profit national insurer. Is it possible markets create such a result? Who will drive efficiency and innovation in a government-run monopoly?!
We all know the status quo is unsustainable. Is there any doubt the private sector is on the cusp of breakthroughs in information technology that will even further reduce the cost of financing and administering health care. So, let’s look at where 85 to 88 percent of every health care dollar is being spent to see opportunities for real reform.
That brings us to consumerism; most notably high deductible health plans (HDHP) coupled with health saving accounts. We Americans want to control our own destiny. Those who hated HMOs would like “Big Brother Health” even less. HDHPs are merely a way to take ownership over our health while at the same time making coverage choices for all more affordable. With premiums 35 to 40 percent lower than first dollar co-pay plans, this real savings – unlike overstated administrative costs – makes coverage far more affordable.
Properly set up, higher out-of-pocket costs at the time of claim are offset by the premium reduction with one big difference; if you don’t use the more expensive first dollar co-pay plan, does the insurer send you a refund? (Now come on: I’m advocating a true insurance product that costs 1/3 less – everyone I talk to loves the idea of giving insurers less premium!) As for that canard about putting off routine care, virtually all HDHPs cover wellness at 100 percent (not subject to a deductible or co-pay).
Literally millions of Americans have bought into this concept, and the effect on the delivery of health care has been profound. For example, it is not a coincidence that everyone is talking about wellness. Or that providers are sharing information on price and quality transparency.
Consumerism is chipping away at the status quo. And the pace of change will only accelerate.
I beg those serious about this “debate” to read “Your Health Matters: What You Need To Know About U.S. Health Care,” authored by Greg Dattilo and Dave Racer (Alethos Press). This carefully documented book sets straight three myths about Canadian style health care that have been repeated so often they are mistaken for fact: to wit, under a single payer system, everyone has access, it costs less and outcomes are better. The truth may literally save your life!
