“This is truly a global movement,” said Dr. Julio Frenk, a former health minister in Mexico and dean of the Harvard School of Public Health. “As countries advance, they are realizing that creating universal healthcare systems is a necessity for long-term economic development.”

…

But the international drive to provide healthcare for everyone is increasingly leaving America behind.

“We are really an outlier,” said David De Ferranti, a former World Bank vice president who heads the Results for Development Institute, an international nonprofit based in Washington.

This situation is increasingly becoming an international embarrassment for the U.S., as well as an impediment to our nation’s economic progress. Developing countries know they cannot compete globally with an unhealthy workforce. Yet, the U.S. continues to limp along, wasting resources on an inefficient for-profit healthcare system, and seeing its global economic dominance erode. Americans are throwing their hard-earned money down a health insurance rat-hole, leaving them unable to put that money toward paying off mortgages, financing education, or buying cars or other consumer products.

America’s inability to expand affordable coverage to all really comes down to a toxic combination of political dysfunction, corporate greed and a troubling lack of social solidarity, which fuels appeals to selfishness and bigoted attitudes toward the poor and vulnerable. We have one major political party refusing to extend health care as a right to all Americans, while the other major party will not fight for, let alone consider, the best option to our healthcare crisis – single payer. And we have a Supreme Court that next month could undo programs that provide health care to the poorest Americans. While we’re fighting amongst ourselves over an issue that should bring all Americans together, the rest of the world is passing us by.

Sylvia@CaliforniaOneCare.org

Sylvia@CaliforniaOneCare.org

We can ALL have decent Health Care without a huge price tag.

Join the movement for Health Care for All

This event is part of the city-wide May 1 demonstration. The East LA area will be tackling the issue of health care in this city, state and country.
The event will take time to

• talk about the broken health care system

• educate about the alternatives

• have opportunities to get your blood pressure and blood sugar checked

• Puppets, music, celebration & more to highlight the solution: SINGLE-PAYER!

Come One, Come all! Giant Puppet Battle and Health Fair Hosted by Health Care for All, The Campaign for a Healthy California, OLA-Wellness/East Wind and the Healthcare for the 99% Affinity Group! Watch as the California Family takes punch after punch from the for-profit Health Insurance Industry Giant! Amazing rebound by embattled Family as they conquer the Giant with Universal Healthcare! Then converge joyously with Occupy LA through the rest of the afternoon in support of the Rights of Everyone!

Tuesday, May 1, 12:00pm-2:00pm
Mariachi Plaza, East 1st Street & Boyle Avenue, Los Angeles

http://ow.ly/aw3t2

Big turn-out for support of Single-Payer is needed! Take public transportation or carpool.

Sponsored by:
Health Care for All-California
The Campaign for a Healthy California
Occupy LA
Occupy LA Wellness

How does the benefit value of Medicare compare to the benefit value of typical large employer plans?  A 2012 update

Prepared by Frank McArdle, Ian Stark, Zachary Levinson, and Tricia Neuman

Kaiser Family Foundation, April 2012

Key findings from this report include:

* For individuals ages 65 and older, Medicare is less generous on average than the comparison large  employer plans. The average benefit value of Medicare for a person age 65 or older in 2011 is 97 percent of the FEHBP Standard Option benefit value and 93 percent of the typical large employer PPO benefit value.

* Relative to the typical large employer PPO plan, Medicare provides somewhat more generous benefits for low-cost individuals ages 65 and older because of the relatively low Part B deductible for individuals who do not use inpatient care; however, Medicare is less generous than the typical large employer PPO plan for seniors with moderate and high costs. Similarly, relative to the FEHBP Standard Option, Medicare is slightly better for low-cost individuals ages 65 or older, but is notably less generous for moderate-cost individuals and somewhat less generous for high-cost individuals.

* Medicare’s average benefit value relative to the comparison employer plans has improved since we last conducted this analysis in 2007, largely because of the 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs in the Part D “doughnut hole” included in the 2010 health reform law, and also because the actuarial value of the FEHBP Standard Option has contracted over the past few years due to changes in its benefit design (mainly, the increase in the limit on out-of-pocket spending).

From the Discussion

Medicare’s benefit value has nonetheless begun to approach the value of the comparison large employer plans, due in large part to the 50 percent discount on brand name drugs in Medicare brought about by health reform, as well as the contraction of the comparison employer plans’ benefit designs. The gap between Medicare and large employer plans could continue to narrow in the future as the health reform law phases in coverage in the “doughnut hole” or if employer coverage continues to erode.

Adding a limit on out-of-pocket spending for inpatient and outpatient services and reducing deductibles would help to bring the Medicare benefit design in line with private large employer plans. The reverse is also true: increasing Medicare beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket costs – an idea floated during recent discussions about the national debt as a way achieve federal savings – could further widen the gap between Medicare and large employer plans and contribute to beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket spending burden.

http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7768-02.pdf

Comment:
By Don McCanne, MD

Supporters of a single payer national health program often refer to the model as “Improved Medicare for All.” This report demonstrates one of the more important reasons why we say that it needs to be improved. Medicare provides less value than the typical large employer PPO plan or the FEHBP Standard Option (the federal employees’ plan).

The largest difference is in the out-of-pocket spending. That difference is diminishing partly because of the increase in out-of-pocket costs for large employer and FEHBP plans (plus an improvement in the Medicare drug benefit). From a policy perspective, we are moving in the wrong direction. Deductibles and coinsurance should be eliminated from Medicare, and private plans, including FEHBP, should be eliminated altogether.

There are other reasons that Medicare needs to be improved. For example, it should be administered on a regional or state basis (with the support of federal funds) rather than by the federal government so that it is more responsive to local needs. The private Medicare Advantage plans should be eliminated because they reduce choice and waste funds. The Private Part D drug plans should be eliminated for the same reasons, folding the benefits into the publicly-administered program.

Incrementalists would suggest reducing deductibles and putting a limit on maximum out-of-pocket spending under Medicare, but if we’re going to fix Medicare, why not go for broke – an improved Medicare for everyone.

Re-posted with permission from pnhp.org.

In more than one-third of states, people can be sent to jail if they can’t or won’t pay outstanding debts. Though California does place burdensome penalties on some debtors, the state isn’t as extreme as Illinois. As far as I know, there aren’t any cases here in the Golden State of people in jail for medical debt, thank goodness. But the fact that anywhere in this country, people are still being penalized for being poor makes America’s insistence that it is the “greatest country in the world” ring hollow. A truly great country does not put people in jail for debts, medical or otherwise. And a truly great country provides health coverage for all its people, making headlines like “Breast Cancer Survivor Jailed for Unpaid $280 Medical Bill” non-existent.

Sylvia@CaliforniaOneCare.org

“Insurance Cafe” – Non Sequitur by Wiley

“Drip, Drip, Drip” – Matt Wuerker for Politico

“Why It’s an American Right to Get Sick and Go Bankrupt” by Mark Fiore

Sylvia@CaliforniaOneCare.org

In what strikes me as the greatest combination since chocolate met peanut butter, it makes nothing but dollars and sense for clever state governments to shift to a single-payer state healthcare system as the key driver for attracting business to their struggling domains.

Ungar goes on to explain how single payer would benefit businesses, especially small businesses, by reducing labor costs and making them more competitive with foreign companies. He implores conservative state legislators to drop their ideological (and I would add, irrational) fear of creeping Communism, and be open to an idea that would spark economic prosperity. These legislators should listen.

But in America, ideology often trumps common sense – especially when that ideology provides some people a lot of money and power. Since the business community is so powerful here in America, it’s frustrating that more small businesses and corporations don’t join the Medicare-for-all movement. Businesses would rather not shell out the increasingly high cost of health care benefits for their employees. But you don’t see many businesses begging the government to take over the responsibility. You don’t see many of them using their powerful lobbyists to persuade conservative lawmakers to vote in favor of a public healthcare system. Instead, many businesses prefer to shove more and more of the costs onto their employees. Or they drop coverage altogether and create more uninsured people, which ends up shoving the costs onto taxpayers.

In America, anything that smacks of the dreaded “S-word” is to be automatically dismissed. In America, government is bad; privatization and profit are good. People are all forced to play the free-market game, even when it doesn’t make sense. If businesses can’t or won’t provide health coverage, then Americans should purchase private insurance in the open market (the more deregulated, the better), or they can just go without. A public healthcare system that will actually cover everyone and save money continues to be a non-starter. I hope more positive articles about single payer in the business press can change these outdated attitudes.

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

insightoutnews:

Univision 34:

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

Paul Mulshine, The Star Ledger, March 25, 2012 – Obamacare health-insurance exchanges are set up to fail

Julian Pecquet, The Hill, March 26, 2012 – Kucinich: Single-payer healthcare on its way regardless of how Supreme Court rules

Peter Morici, SunSentinel, March 26, 2012 – Overturning health care law could lead to a single-payer system

Robert Reich, The Huffington Post, March 26, 2012 – Health Care Jujitsu

Reid Cherlin, GQ, March 27, 2012 – Take It From Me: Defending Obamacare is Super-Hard

George Zornick, The Nation, March 27, 2012 – If the Mandate Fails, Single Payer Awaits

Ezra Klein, Bloomberg, March 28, 2012 – Individual Mandate Is Ryan Tax Credit by Other Name

Meghna Chakrabarti, WBUR, March 28, 2012 – Lawmakers Propose Single-Payer System For Mass.

E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, March 28, 2012 – Judicial activists in the Supreme Court

Emil Guillermo, San Francisco Chronicle, March 28, 2012 – My Mom, the Supreme Court, and the Affordable Care Act

Michael D. Shear, The New York Times, March 28, 2012 – If Health Law Is Overturned, What Will Liberals Do?

Josh Barro, Forbes, March 28, 2012 – How Obamacare’s Rejection Would Lead to Single Payer

Timothy Noah, The New Republic, March 28, 2012 – Single-Payer Briar Patch

Cathy Young, Newsday, March 29, 2012 – What’s really wrong with Obamacare

Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post, March 29, 2012 – A stronger prescription for what ails health care

Renne Landers, Health Affairs Blog, March 29, 2012 – On The Individual Mandate: Towards A Single-Payer System Or Public Option?

Ezra Klein, The Washington Post, March 29, 2012 – If Obamacare is overturned, will that lead to single payer? And would that be a good thing?

Scripps Howard News Service, March 29, 2012 – RedBlueAmerica: Will ‘Obamacare’ survive?

Mark Mardell, BBC News, March 29, 2012 – What if Supreme Court strikes down Obama healthcare act?

Maggie Fox, National Journal, March 29, 2012 – After the Ruling

Emily P. Walker, MedPage Today, March 29, 2012 – ACA Alternatives Waiting in the Wings

George Lauer, California Healthline, March 29, 2012 – Experts: Medicaid Expansion Will Stand; Mandate’s Fate Unclear

Noah Rothman, Mediaite, March 29, 2012 – Chris Matthews, Ezra Klein Identify Strategy To Impose ‘De Facto Single Payer System’

Beth Hawkins, MinnPost, March 29, 2012 – Growth & Justice lays out its case for Minnesota single-payer health care

David Frum, The Daily Beast, March 29, 2012 – The Wall Street Journal: Unwitting Advocates of Single-Payer

Karen Dolan, The Huffington Post, March 29, 2012 – If Health Care Reform Falls, Look in the Mirror

Steve Erickson, The American Prospect, March 30, 2012 – Single-Payer or Bust

And…

Uwe E. Reinhardt, The New York Times, Economix, March 30, 2012 – The Supreme Court and the National Conversation on Health Care Reform

Reader Comment:

By Don McCanne
San Juan Capistrano, CA

The intense attention being given to the constitutionality of the individual mandate and the severability of guaranteed issue and community rating and to the constitutionality of the Medicaid expansion superficially seems to have detracted from the fundamental issue of whether or not the Affordable Care Act itself should serve as a durable model for health care reform.

With the best possible outcome of the Supreme Court deliberations, we’ll still be faced with uninsurance (at least 26 million uninsured), underinsurance (low actuarial value plans with spartan essential benefits) and unaffordability (lack of effective systemic cost containment).

Right now we are seeing a surge in commentaries declaring that we will end up with single payer (Medicare for all) if the mandate and guaranteed issue and community rating are struck down by the Supreme Court, simply because that’s the only rational financing option left for us.

We will, in fact, end up with single payer, but not because of the pending Supreme Court decision. We will adopt a single payer system simply because we will not be able to continue to tolerate uninsurance, underinsurance and unaffordability.

Additional articles…

Scott Keyes, ThinkProgress, March 30, 2012 – GOP Attorney General Suing Over Obamacare Supports Single-Payer: ‘I Trust The Government More’

Sahil Kapur, TalkingPointsMemo, April 2, 2012 – Why Overturning ‘Obamacare’ Could Lead To Single-Payer

Miles Mogulescu, The Huffington Post, April 3, 2012 – Conservatives and Liberals Agree: Medicare for All Would Be Constitutional

Robert I. Field, The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 5, 2012 – Is public option the last one?

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org