Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing that everyone in his state, including those here illegally, be required to purchase health insurance. In 2004, an estimated 43 percent of all births covered by the state's Medi-Cal program were to illegal aliens.The cost of those 105,000 deliveries was $400 million.



According to Schwarzenegger the issue isn't whether or not those here illegally should be treated, but how they can be treated most cost-effectively -globalEyeNews

Cato @ Liberty:

Arnold Kling is far too kind in his description of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s new health care proposal. While I suppose it is possible for the plan to have been worse (it could have endorsed Massachusetts-style managed competition, for instance), the plan gets almost everything wrong, from its tax on employment to its individual mandate, from increased welfare subsidies to increased insurance regulation. The proposal will end up hurting workers, employers, health care providers, and health care consumers. Consider just some of what the Governator is calling for:

* More spending, more taxes. According to the nonpartisan taxpayers foundation, California’s state/local tax burden is the 15th highest in the nation, and its business climate ranks 45th out of the 50 states. Californians already pay $4,451 per-capita in state and local taxes. Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposal is expected to cost at least $12 billion in additional state spending. He would finance it.....More

Labels: Arnold Schwarzenegger, california health insurance, health insurance

Show Me the Money would be an appropriate message to deliver to Washington and the healthcare industry when it comes to unmasking the clues to the runaway cost of health insurance and the money-leak that holds America's health hostage and brought the whole system to critical mass.

"The runaway cost of health insurance in America requires that two major issues be honestly and urgently addressed: the untenable pricing of network-wide healthcare services that is the result of too much provider-milking of the proverbial health insurance "cash cow" and the cost driving nightmare of having to purchase and manage health plans through an entangled mess of no less than 50 various state-imposed insurance code packages."

Somewhere in the critically entangled mess of state controlled, no-fly-zone, consumer choice-absent, gravy train riding, health insurance model; somewhere, purloining in the dimly lit, cigar-smoking back room of secrets and lies, where politics and provider imprudence have crafted policy that has resulted in dropping the American healthcare consumer on his knees, lay the clues. "SHOW ME THE MONEY"!!!

globalEyeNews: health insurance in the globalEye

LA Daily News - Health care plan recipe for disaster
BY JON COUPAL, Guest Columnist
Article Last Updated: 12/19/2006 06:52:12 PM PST

STATE Senate President Don Perata has a plan to provide all uninsured working Californians with health insurance at an estimated cost of $5 billion to $7 billion without a tax increase. OK?

The Perata plan would force businesses that do not provide health insurance and their employees, through a payroll deduction, to pay into a state agency that would attempt to negotiate for 'affordable' coverage. When paying taxes, workers would have to show proof of medical insurance.

This is just plain wrong on so many levels. Let me count the ways.

A plan that is estimated to cost $5 billion to $7 billion will, if past government program estimates are any guide, cost a lot more than first advertised. One only has to look at the Bush prescription benefit plan as a reminder.

Apparently our state's second-most-powerful elected official believes there is such a thing as a free lunch. He should know that a plan that compels businesses to lay out more for labor than its market value is a tax on those businesses. It will cost businesses and, as the increased costs are passed on, it will also cost consumers, too.

Employees, many working at low-wage jobs, will see a reduction in their paychecks. Just like the other taxes they pay, this health insurance charge will translate into less take-home pay.

As the cost of employment goes up, workers are likely to face a second problem: fewer jobs. What is worse than no health insurance? No health insurance and no job.

And proof of insurance to pay taxes? This would only force one more nuisance, clerical mandate on a public already overwhelmed with nuisance mandates.....More"

When it comes to health care: The more things change, the more they stay the same, more than ever.
globalEyeNews: health insurance in the globalEye


HOW THE POOR DIE - George Orwell (1946)

In the year 1929 I spent several weeks in the Hôpital X, in the fifteenth ARRONDISSEMENT of Paris. The clerks put me through the usual third-degree at the reception desk, and indeed I was kept answering questions for some twenty minutes before they would let me in. If you have ever had to fill up forms in a Latin country you will know the kind of questions I mean. For some days past I had been unequal to translating Reaumur into Fahrenheit, but I know that my temperature was round about 103, and by the end of the interview I had some difficulty in standing on my feet. At my back a resigned little knot of patients, carrying bundles done up in coloured handkerchiefs, waited their turn to be questioned.

After the questioning came the bath—a compulsory routine for all newcomers, apparently, just as in prison or the workhouse. My clothes were taken away from me, and after I had sat shivering for some minutes in five inches of warm water I was given a linen nightshirt and a short blue flannel dressing-gown—no slippers, they had none big enough for me, they said—and led out into the open air. This was a night in February and I was suffering from pneumonia. The ward we were going to was 200 yards away and it seemed that to get to it you had to cross the hospital grounds. Someone stumbled in front of me with a lantern. The gravel path was frosty underfoot, and the wind whipped the nightshirt round my bare calves. When we got into the ward I was aware of a strange feeling of familiarity whose origin I did not succeed in pinning down till later in the night. It was a long, rather low, ill-lit room, full of murmuring voices and with three rows of beds surprisingly close together. There was a foul smell, faecal and yet sweetish. As I lay down I saw on a bed nearly opposite me a small, round-shouldered, sandy-haired man sitting half naked while a doctor and a student performed some strange operation on him........More

The Health Care Choice Act: Eliminating Barriers to Personal Freedom and Market Competition: "

Research: Health Care
The Health Care Choice Act:
Eliminating Barriers to Personal Freedom and Market Competition
by Robert E. Moffit, Ph. D.
WebMemo #1164

July 17, 2006

While interstate commerce in goods and services is routine in virtually every other area of the national economy, such as banking and financial services, it is largely frustrated in the health care sector by law and government regulation. For individuals and families, this means that they are not able to secure the kind of coverage they want at the prices they wish to pay. The Health Care Choice Act (H.R. 2355 and S.1015), sponsored by Representative John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), would amend current law to allow for interstate commerce in health insurance plans while preserving states’ primary responsibility for the regulation of health insurance. These changes would broaden and intensify competition among health plans and medical providers, encourage a serious review of existing health care regulation in the states, and expand the choice of millions of Americans of more affordable health insurance plans. The result: reduced health care costs and greater access to health care coverage.

What the Bill Does

The bill would reform the individual health insurance market by allowing individuals and families who reside in one state to buy a more affordable health insurance plan domiciled or licensed in another state. Likewise, health insurance.......more

Google News | Healthcare Policy in America: Perpetuating a Vacuum of Failure-American Chronicle-globalEyeNews

A recent article in the Detroit News reported that, according to key findings obtained from a survey of 203 local company executives by John Bailey & Associates, a majority of businesses in Southeast Michigan expect to either scale back on health ... ...

**Our blog, Health Insurance-In the globalEye by globalEyeNews , is proudly listed in Technorati's Top 20 Blogs about: Health Insurance review.

Google News | Economies of Scale: Getting Small Business and Large Companies to Drink from the Same Risk Pool-American Chronicle-globalEyeNews

... By joining together, small employers will enjoy greater bargaining power, economies of scale, and administrative efficiencies. ...

**Our blog, Health Insurance-In the globalEye by globalEyeNews , is proudly listed in Technorati's Top 20 Blogs about: Health Insurance review.

Healthcare Policy in America: Perpetuating a Vacuum of Failure

A recent article in the Detroit News reported that, according to key findings obtained from a survey of 203 local company executives by John Bailey & Associates, a majority of businesses in Southeast Michigan expect to either scale back on health insurance coverage for their employees or eliminate them entirely. Over 60 percent of the companies surveyed are considering reductions in future health care benefits for employees while another 27 percent may eliminate medical insurance altogether.

It's no secret that the burden of skyrocketing healthcare costs has become too much for small business (and their employees) to bear. As unclearness and anxiety over the issues would have it, there is no lack of finger-pointing to go along with it, either. In an interesting turnabout, the tone of the Detroit News article and statements of the executives interviewed were wrought with indicting concerns over the issue of unhealthy employee lifestyle and its effect on the high cost of health insurance coverage. This is only a mirror of the incoherent healthcare message emanating from Washington that has America in the grips of frustration and inertia. No one seems to really know what's wrong, how it all went wrong or how to fix it. The worst of it is that no one really seems to want to try. The consensus in Washington is, there is no consensus.

Most in Washington are determined to selfishly tend their little plot of political/ideological real estate, at the expense of a simple little thing called common ground. Meanwhile, the vast adjoining American landscape is littered with the healthcare plight of the medically unattended, uninsured and disenfranchised. If only there were a few in Washington with the undiluted vision and conviction to lift their eyes toward the horizon and view the collateral damage.

President Bush would like America to become an "ownership society". All well and good, however, those words will continue to ring ironically impotent until Washington resolves to take ownership of America. The recently expired Senate "Health Week" dissolved in unmerciful scorn of the ever-widening procession of the sick and lame, while America helplessly looked on in hope of some political higher power ascending to "stir the waters".

The runaway cost of health insurance in America requires that two major issues be honestly and urgently addressed: the untenable pricing of network-wide healthcare services that is the result of too much provider-milking of the proverbial health insurance "cash cow" and the cost driving nightmare of having to purchase and manage health plans through an entangled mess of no less than 50 various state-imposed insurance code packages.

American workers have been precariously hostage to a healthcare system that has navigated them on a course of steadily evaporating choice and access; a system pirated by an unholy alliance of politics and provider imprudence. The money has been easy, something along the order of shooting fish in a barrel, the American worker and his disposable income being the savory target. The easy-money politics of inertia have kept the dollars flowing, but, the incredible folly is that network providers have royally out-priced the market resulting from years of network-wide "gravy train riding" and the system is collapsing, like a house of cards, under the weight of its own acquisitiveness. Network prices have exploded......More>>>

2005 HSA-eligible Health Insurance Plan Costs Dropped in Sharp Contrast with Rising Overall Health Insurance Premiums

In an amazing show of consumer strength and confidence, 2005 HSA-eligible health insurance plan costs dropped in sharp contrast with rising overall health insurance premiums according to a qualified eHealthInsurance press release (below), extracted from its in-depth HSA annual report. With the plethora of healthcare ideologies and legistlation in current circulation, none seem to be registering as highly on the health insurance consumer confidence scale as health savings account plans.

Increased attention given to HSA legistlation, if Congress will ever detour from petty political squabbling and center itself on healthcare issues that seem to matter most to the American healthcare consumer, would go a long way to stemming the tide of runaway healthcare inflation and the critically rising numbers of the uninsured that are plaguing America.

Forty-one percent of HSA-eligible plan buyers in the eHealthInsurance study reported being previously uninsured. Among purchasers, the age groups that had the highest percentage of previously uninsured were children and young adults up to age 29.

Also, do you know of a health insurance plan that covers the cost of aspirin, just one of the many approved health savings account expenditures available to HSA plan holders? Just where do our traditional health insurance premium dollars go, you know, the ones that don't roll over yearly as HSA plan dollars do? Certainly not toward aspirin, cough syrup and the like. No wonder these consumer-driven health insurance plans have skyrocketted in popularity and confidence over recent years.
globalEyeNews.eXtra.health insurance




Press Release: eHealthInsurance™

Individuals and families pay significantly less for HSA-eligible health insurance plans in 2005



MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., May 10, 2006 - Individuals paid 17 percent less for HSA-eligible health insurance plans purchased through eHealthInsurance in 2005 than consumers who bought similar plans in 2004. On average, individual consumers paid $114 in 2005 versus $138 in 2004. This is significant when compared to the near double-digit increases in health insurance premiums reported by other organizations over the past several years.[1] This and other data on HSA adoption in 2005 was released today in a semi-annual report by eHealthInsurance, the nation’s leading online source of health insurance for individuals, families and small businesses.

The improved affordability of HSA-eligible plans may be the key factor leading uninsured Americans to HSAs. Forty-one percent of purchasers of HSA-eligible plans in the study reported being previously uninsured. The age groups that had the highest percentage of uninsured before purchasing an HSA-eligible plan are children and young adults up to age 29.

“Since their introduction in 2004, HSAs have been one of the fastest growing products in the consumer directed health care category, giving Americans more affordable health insurance plans and greater control of their health care dollars,” says Gary Lauer, CEO of eHealthInsurance. “Our data verifies that HSAs are attractive to individuals and families who did not previously have health insurance. It is our goal to continue to provide transparency and choice in....More

Inside: Stateline.org - U.S. Insurance Bill Upsets States


globalEyeNews.Op-Ed.health insurance
When it comes to health insurance in America there seems to be an uncurable political obsession with the total absense of logic. Also, what's good for the goose doesn't seem apply to the gander, either.

The so-called 'Enzi Bill' which is being hotly contested in the Senate and by consumer groups across America, endeavors to allow small businesses to drink from the same priviledged health insurance waters that large companies have enjoyed through self-insured programs since the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) became federal law in 1974.

Since 1974 large companies through ERISA have been able to self-insure without having to comply with tedious state imposed regulations. This glorious amnesty has enabled large companies to sidestep state regulations in order to offer comprehensive health insurance packages to their employees at substantially more economical rates; in effect, bargain-hunt across state lines.

Since then, though, there have been some 'ringers', some of the more exemplary health insurance products around have been minted through these offerings. What the 'Enzi Bill' proposes to do is to empower trade and professional "associations" with the same priviledges, under ERISA jurisdiction, in order to to craft the most cost-effective health insurance plans possible for their members and, even more importantly, enable them to engage plans without the cost-prohibitive administrative nightmare of having to deal with the gnarling complexities of 50 unique sets of state mandated regulations.

As with large company self-insure deployments, the Department of Labor, a staunch supporter of AHP legistlation, would be the master keyholder to any such healthcare initiatives. Here's what the (DOL) has to say about AHP's:

"In a voluntary health benefits system, how can small employers be encouraged to offer coverage? The challenge is to create incentives and remove barriers. Preemption of 50 state insurance regulatory regimes under federal ERISA law has allowed large employers and unions to provide cost-effective health benefits. A federal structure for small employers would bring stability, uniformity and lower costs for health care coverage."

"AHPs will provide small businesses the opportunity to band together through trade and professional associations to purchase affordable health benefits. By joining together, small employers will enjoy greater bargaining power, economies of scale, and administrative efficiencies. In this way, AHPs will level the playing field and give participating small employers the same advantages as larger employers and employers who provide benefits through Taft-Hartley plans (plans sponsored jointly by a union and two or more employers)."

"The lack of health insurance in America disproportionately affects workers in small businesses. About half of all uninsured Americans are in families headed by workers who are self-employed or who work at firms with fewer than 100 employees. Workers at the smallest firms are far less likely to be covered on the job, and far more likely to be without insurance from any source."

"Among private-sector firms with fewer than 100 employees, health benefits wer offered at just 49% of work sites in 2000, compared with 98% among larger firms."

"Considering only low-wage work sites, where at least half of the employees earned less than $9.50 per hour, the disparity between small and large firms is even greater. Benefits were offered at just 34% of small firm low-wage work sites, compared with 95% of large firms."

"Among 600 small businesses responding to a recent survey, less than one-third currently offer insurance, but about three-fourths said they would be 'very' or 'somewhat likely' to participate in an AHP that offered lower prices, more choices, or less paperwork."

As far as regulatory devices that would govern AHP entities, rigid ERISA compliance doctrine, alot of which is already in place, would enforce consumer protection safeguards through DOL.

According to the DOL, all AHP entry requirements would be determined by qualified actuary and in the event an AHP became unable to satisfy its financial obligations, "DOL could assume trusteeship over the AHP and pay premiums to a stop-loss and/or indemnification insurer to ensure that consumers’ outstanding claims for health benefits are paid."

According to the DOL release, attempts at "cherry-picking" that would sculpt plans that benefit only healthy people or "make it easier for insurers to target their coverage to businesses with healthier workers (Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.)", would be fruitless in that, among an arsenal of pre-emptive barriers:

Only bona fide associations that are in existence for three years for purposes other than providing health insurance would be eligible to sponsor an AHP.

The legislation makes clear that AHPs will have to comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), prohibiting group health plans from excluding high-risk individuals or employers with high claims experience.

It's time cut the bull and all the political inuendo that continues to sicken America. Considereing the self- insured sector appears to have been the least affected by the healthcare crisis that is crippling the American family and workplace, it would seem that common sense insists that a closer look be taken at the model.

If the possiblity does exist that AHP legistlation would destroy state-fought health insurance standards, how is it that few of its critics can be more specific than soundbites and generalizations that attempt to engender paranoia in the masses?

How is it that in such media dissertations on jeapordy and demise, there hasn't been a telling roll call of large self-insured ERISA/DOL sanctioned villains that would demonstrate the point?

That kind of blank political inuendo is called wanting to have your bread buttered on both sides.

You can obtain a free copy of the DOL/AHP Report, ASSOCIATION HEALTH PLANS - IMPROVING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE QUALITY HEALTH CARE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES , here.







Stateline.org: Top Story

U.S. insurance Bill Upsets States
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline.org Staff Writer

Thursday, April 27, 2006

A proposal before the U.S. Senate designed to help small businesses buy cheaper health insurance has many state officials up in arms because it could strip states of their power to regulate carriers and dictate what insurers must cover.

At least 39 state attorneys general, three governors and 16 state insurance regulators object to the legislation.

“This bill contains provisions that will erode state oversight of health insurance plans and eliminate consumer protections in the areas of mandated benefits and internal grievance procedures,” 39 members of the National Association of Attorneys General said in a letter to U.S. senators.

The controversial measure would let trade associations buy coverage from insurance companies and offer it to members and their employees nationwide, even if the plans didn’t comply with individual state laws.

The legislation would let existing small business plans avoid state regulations too, in order to make sure new plans don’t have an unfair advantage.

Business leaders argue that insurance companies are loathe to offer nationwide products today, because products they offer must comply with at least 50 different sets of laws.

They point to the experience of the Associated Builders and Contractors, which shut down its 43-year-old health insurance plan after its insurance company quit and more than 50 others declined to take its place.

Carriers said they were unwilling to assume the business because state laws they would have to obey dictated how they could set rates, who must be eligible and what services they must provide.

“We were legislated out of business, effectively, by the states,” Joseph E. Rossman, ABC’s vice-president of fringe benefits, said

The so-called Enzi Bill, named after U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican, grows out of an effort to help small-business groups such as ABC offer members the
chance....More

Inside: Congressional Testimony on The Healthcare Choice Act, H.R. 2335


What a mess. No wonder healthcare coverage in America is unraveling. In the recent New York Times article, Death by Insurance (subscription), Paul Krugman references comments (Wall Street Journal) from a doctor concerning 'the excess expenses he incurs trying to deal with 301 different private insurance plans. According to Dr. Brewer, he currently employs two full-time staff members for billing, and his two secretaries spend half their time collecting insurance information.' The sum of it: too much information results in no information. So it goes with the American healthcare consumer; plagued with the same. When you have 50 states, with 50 independent state controls, 50 different sets of mandates, 50 distinctly separate licensing and coverage requirements, all doing insurance business within the insulation of the 'no-compete' clause, the too much/no information syndrome mightily kicks in.

Is there a health insurance Expert in America? Information we can trust? Or is the business so tragically fragmented nationally that no one really knows for sure about anything? Is that why there are so many cockamamy viewpoints concerning America's healthcare sickness and its cure? Is it a terminal case of too much information results in no information?

Are the states that license standard non-employer-based family policies for four at $171 per month (table below) stupid or indifferent toward the healthcare needs of their residents? Or, are those of us that live in states that up the ante to over $700 per month for the same, luxuriating in the safe harbor of a smarter and more concerned state leadership?

Oh, yes, the issues are complex. Why would healthy New Jersey residents be allowed to purchase more cost-effective policies licenced in the state of California, when the State of New Jersey and its licencees would be stuck with the sicker ones who are left behind? Do we need that kind of protection from the "evil" health insurance companies? But tell us, if your business agenda mandates restrictions to certain consumers for purchasing in a way that you believe disadvantages others, are your offerings valid and legal? Could be, what you have is a felonious recipe for failure, millions uninsured and a healthcare system ready to hit the wall.
[globalEyeNews.eXtra.healthinsurance]





Subject:

Congressional Testimony on The Healthcare Choice Act, H.R. 2335


Extract:

Hearing before the Subcommittee on Health of the Committe on Energy and Commerce:

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION on H.R. 2335

JUNE 28, 2005

Serial No. 109-23

Testimony:

David Gratzer, M.D., Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research


STATEMENT OF DAVID GRATZER

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee-- subcommittee. I am honored to testify today in these hearings on “The Health Care Choice Act” before the Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Health. My name is David Gratzer. I am a physician and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute in New York. I’m speaking today in support of Congressman Shadegg’s efforts. The views I present are my own and do not necessarily represent those of the Manhattan Institute.

As you may know, insurance premiums vary greatly from state to state. eHealthInsurance, a leading online insurance brokerage, recently compared the cost of a standard family insurance policy ($2,000 deductible with a 20% co-insurance) across the nation’s 50 largest cities, involving some 4,000 insurance plans and 140 insurance companies. The results are startling. Consider: a non-employer-based family policy for four in Kansas City, Mo., costs about $170 per month while similar coverage in Boston tops more than $750 a month. (Please see the accompanying table, which further illustrates the range.)

Why the price difference? Many states dictate the type of services and providers. New York, for instance, requires that the services of a podiatrist be covered. It’s a commonly quoted statistic that the average person walks about 150,000 miles in a lifetime. Let’s hope the majority of this journey is on healthy, bunion-free feet. But should every insurance policy in the Empire State really be required to include podiatric services? Acupuncturists are mandated in 11 states, massage therapists in 4, osteopaths in 24, and chiropractors in 47, driving up the price of even the most basic insurance plans.

Some states have gone further. Laws force insurers to sell to any applicant (guaranteed issue) and at the same price, regardless of age or health (community rating). Faced with higher premiums for insurance they seldom use, the young and healthy drop their coverage, leaving an insurance pool of older, sicker people - and even higher premiums. After a decade of such political meddling, the average monthly cost of a family policy in New Jersey bests the monthly lease of a Ferrari. In such an environment, many insurance carriers choose not to do business; in Vermont, for example, just three companies sell to......More>>

"Forging new revenue payloads (taxes) to prop up an already overfunded, price-bloated, bankrupt and failing healthcare system that will continue to hold the American healthcare consumer and health insurance providers hostage is the "ideology of insanity". -globalEyeNews

[The healthcare ideology wars continue in Washington. New HSA (Health Savings Account) legistlation S.2549, the Health Savings Account Affordability Act, would allow individuals to use their account funds to purchase high-deductible health insurance. This would expand current law which allows HSA account funds to pay for out-of-pocket expenses, but excludes their use for the purchase of insurance. According to DeMint, the improvement "would allow small business owners across the nation to provide tax-free contributions that could be then used by their employees to purchase health insurance that is affordable, flexible, and portable. Many workers would pay nothing but they would own everything.” DeMint also speaks out against Bill S.637, the Small Employers Health Benefits Program Act, a proposal sponsored by U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), in which small businesses could pool together as part of a government-run health care program to offer health coverage to their employees. According to DeMint, "once the government takes over the management of health care for millions of Americans, liberals in Congress will begin rationing care with one-size-fits-all mandates that limit choices." Ideology, though intriguing to intellectual appetite, is not the real issue when it comes to configuring a whole new health insurance model. Economics is. The price of healthcare in America is spiraling out of control, beyond containment. Any new model must address this primal issue by providing economic mechanisms that drive prices downward. Forging new revenue payloads (taxes) to prop up an already overfunded, price-bloated, bankrupt and failing healthcare system that will continue to hold the American healthcare consumer and health insurance providers hostage is the "ideology of insanity".]
globalEyeNews.tip.health insurance


Press Release: United States Senator - Jim DeMint:

DeMint Testifies Before Senate Finance Committee on Small Business Health Care

Calls for Legislation to Make HSAs More Affordable and to Allow Consumers to Shop for Insurance Across State Lines


April 6th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) testified before the Senate Committee on Finance on ways to improve health coverage for millions of small business employees. Specifically, DeMint called on the committee to consider legislation allowing workers to use tax-free HSA contributions to help pay premiums for affordable, high-deductible health insurance. DeMint also rejected the idea of a new government-run health care program and encouraged senators to support a proposal allowing Americans to access affordable health coverage in other states.

“If we want to help millions of small business employees access affordable health insurance, we are going to have to make a small but important change to the law regulating health savings accounts,” said Senator DeMint. “Americans who want to access HSA benefits should be allowed to use their account funds to purchase high-deductible health insurance. Under current law, they can use their account funds to pay for out-of-pocket expenses, but they are banned from using them to buy insurance. This improvement would allow small business owners across the nation to provide tax-free contributions that could be then used by their employees to purchase health insurance that is affordable, flexible, and portable. Many workers would pay nothing but they would own everything.”

Besides empowering small businesses with the ability to offer a tax-free cash health care benefit without the paperwork and liability burdens associated with traditional employer-sponsored health coverage, S.2549, the Health Savings Account Affordability Act would also give individuals who purchase HSAs on their own virtually the same tax benefits as those with employer-sponsored insurance. This would help self-employed, unemployed, and workers for companies that do not currently offer insurance. Americans who are not working, especially early retirees, could pay premium for the purchase of non-group HSA plans tax-free from an HSA account.

“It’s time to level the playing field between those who get health coverage through their employer and those who do not,” said Senator DeMint. “By allowing HSA contributions to be used to pay for qualified health insurance, we can instantly help millions of Americans without employer-sponsored insurance access affordable coverage that the IRS tax code currently puts out of reach.”

Senator DeMint rejected the idea of making millions of small business employees dependent on the federal government for their health care. According to S.637, the Small Employers Health Benefits Program Act, a proposal sponsored by U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), small businesses could pool together as part of a government-run health care program to offer health coverage to their employees. The program, which is estimated to cost $73 billion over the next 10 years, would be paid for by American taxpayers through.......More>>>

"The facts are these: the health insurance Cash Cow Has Expired; the vast $niche pool is fast becoming the "Dead Pool"; the American healthcare consumers' pockets are empty, no longer able or willing to sustain the runaway-inflated healthcare costs and health insurance premiums that have resulted from years of network-wide gravy train riding......"

While millions go without health insurance (an everyday occurrence exploding into almost every income sector) and a major healthcare breakdown looms, the point that eludes most is that the crisis exists soley because network medical providers, across the board, have out-priced the market. In a mad effort to get an always bigger piece of the vast consumer $niche pool (pie), network costs have exploded beyond containment, beyond anyone's ability to pay. Universal (National) healthcare is just another name for a federal government bailout of the industry for the shortfall. For those who promulgate that overuse has lead to runaway costs, I'd say try living in the real life world of an overworked, overtaxed, overburdened, over child-cared, life-compressed middle income household of 3 or more for a few hours (Former Secretary of State, George P. Shultz).........

globalEyeNews.eXtra.health insurance
'Without reform, the U.S. health care system will hit the proverbial brick wall in the not-too-distant future. Health care costs and insurance premiums are rapidly increasing, making both insured and uninsured consumers worse off. After not wanting to touch health care reform with a 10-foot pole in the immediate post-Clinton era, policymakers are again confronting the fact that change is desperately needed. The direction of that change, however, is anything but settled. Does the solution lie in private markets, greater government involvement, or some combination of the two?" This New England Journal of Medicine extract from the Cato Institute publication Healthy Competition: What's Holding Back Health Care and How to Free aptly describes prevalent healthcare moods and trends in America. Indecision, apprehension, unclearness; bemused can be applied. In the news release below you will find why some experts believe open-market reform is a "blueprint for re-invigorating America's troubled health care sector."

............The facts are these: the health insurance Cash Cow Has Expired; the vast $niche pool is fast becoming the "Dead Pool"; the American healthcare consumers' pockets are empty, no longer able or willing to sustain the runaway-inflated healthcare costs and health insurance premiums that have resulted from years of network-wide gravy train riding; and both, healthcare consumers and providers, don't know where to turn for the next dollar. The trends are ominous. The healthcare industry at the top of the food chain, at the least, is unnerved and the American healthcare consumer is reeling. As with every hyper-inflationary market, the bubble will burst eventually (more than likely). The sad, disgraceful truth is, solemn oaths have been broken, trusts abused and the vital well-being of the American people has been feloniously compromised. The fix? The system may well have passed the point of no return; open-market reform, a moot point. Whether the case or not, a head on confrontaion with the issues at hand will require high doses of "inspired leadership" from Washington. Too much to hope for?
[globalEyeNews.opinion.health insurance] "

The Cato Institute: News Release

Healthy Competition: What's Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It

September 14, 2005

Media Contact: (202) 789-5200

Healthy Competition, a new book published today by the Cato Institute, provides a blueprint for re-invigorating America's troubled health care sector. Former Secretary of State George Shultz calls Healthy Competition "essential reading."

Michael F. Cannon, Cato's director of health policy studies, and Michael D. Tanner, Cato's director of health and welfare studies, explain how market competition makes products of ever-increasing quality available to an ever-increasing number of consumers.

They demonstrate how market competition can do the same for medical care and health insurance. The authors even show how encouraging competition.....More>>

Bush Administration fires back at Washington Post's Sebastian Mallaby on Health Savings Accounts

It seems near impossible to see behind the thick political veil when it comes to healthcare issues in America. The political tussling, spinning and positioning nearly always dooms any attempt at approaching an issue squarely. While career politicians and media elite are busy coveting strategic political gain, the American healthcare ship is sinking. Too bad. It almost makes callous indifference an admirable character trait by comparison.

According to a recently released Commonwealth Fund report, the percentage of working-age Americans with moderate to middle incomes who lacked health insurance for at least part of the year rose to 41 percent in 2005, a dramatic increase from the 28 percent in 2001 without coverage. According to the report, National health care spending is climbing by more than 7 percent per year, outpacing economic growth by a substantial margin and that 'Gaps in health insurance coverage—a problem that has long afflicted lower-income U.S. families—is increasingly becoming an all-American problem.' Key findings (multimedia presentation available) of the survey point out that more than half of the uninsured adults said they were having problems paying their medical bills or had incurred debt to cover their expenses. According to lead author Sara R. Collins, Ph.D., senior program officer and director of the Fund's Program on the Future of Health Insurance, the represent 'an eXplosion of the insurance crisis into those with moderate incomes'.

Somebody, please, step up to the podium and clear the cigar smoke. The bottom line is, network-wide healthcare cost in America is out of control beyond containment. If you or a loved one has ever had an extended hospital stay, you could lament the truth. Marketing, research, technology, IT..... somebody's been draining the American healthcare consumer's lifeblood for too long and been calling it health insurance. It's all about the disposable American dollar and whose got the stealth to pry it loose and leverage it into a foolproof consumer niche pool. Universal, consumer-driven, mandatory.....what's in a name when it all smells the same? Crisis? Avarice-driven, spiralling, network-wide, price-gouged inflationary costs have bankrupted all and the lowly American healthcare consumer is stuck with the tab for the shortfall. Stuck, as always. Only, now, he(she) can't pay or won't; not from those empty pockets. Check the ranks of the uninsured. What's the fix? Network pricing structure? New pockets to pick? The Federali? Hmm. A little more wood for the fire, below.
[globalEyeNews.eXtra.health insurance]


For Immediate Release February 13, 2006
Whitehouse: News and Policices

Setting the Record Straight: The Washington Post's Sebastian Mallaby on Health Savings Accounts

Setting the Record Straight



Setting The Record Straight On The Benefits Of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).

Mallaby Claims That HSAs Are For "Rich People" And "Healthy People".
"The administration is proposing a new kind of 401(k), and using it as an inducement to quit low-deductible insurance. Rich people, who gain most from the tax breaks on saving, will be first to sign on; healthy people, who subsidize sicker people in company health plans, will be right behind them." (Sebastian Mallaby, Op-Ed, "Ownership Society Redux," The Washington Post, 2/13/06)

But Studies Have Shown That HSAs Have Broad Appeal.Enrollment In HSAs Has Tripled Since March 2005.
" At least three million consumers currently receive health coverage through high-deductible health insurance plans offered in conjunction with health saving accounts (HSAs), according to preliminary results of a new study by America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP). According to the study, enrollment in the new insurance policies eligible for HSAs has roughly tripled since last March when a similar AHIP survey found that 1,031,000 people were covered by HSA-compatible insurance policies." (America's Health Insurance Plans, "HSAs Triple in 10 Months," Press Release, 1/26/06)

Studies Show That Low-Income And Previously Uninsured Americans Are Signing Up For HSAs.
" These lower-premium plans are an important option, especially for those who might not otherwise be able to afford coverage, Ignagni said, noting that among the companies tracking the information, previously uninsured people purchased 37% of the individual policies. Twenty-seven percent of the policies in the small group market have been sold to employers who did not previously offer coverage to their employees. Shattering the myth that these new products only attract young and healthy individuals, the census indicates that nearly half of people covered by HSA-eligible insurance are over the age of 40." (America's Health Insurance Plans, "HSAs More Than Double In Six Months, New AHIP Study Shows," Press Release, 5/4/05)

Survey Finds More Previously Uninsured Americans Enrolled In HSA Programs Than Traditional Health Plans.
"The survey found that HSA-eligible enrollees are of all ages and of no different health status than people enrolled in traditional coverage. 'This survey finding dispels the myth that HSAs are only for the young and healthy,' said Sullivan. 'In addition, we are also bolstered by the finding that the number of previously uninsured currently enrolled in a HSA-eligible product is double that of enrollees in traditional........More

Bush,Economy,The 90 Foot Rule,Toothless Reform,Cash Cow Expires

Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform......' a page out of the Newt Gingrich playbook for health care reform(AFL-CIO) ' or the Wile E. Coyote ' Acme Rocket ' plan or just ' Toothless Reform ' ?


[It's all so hard to figure, isn't it? According to an official statement by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney (below) regarding recent Massachusetts healthcare reform legistlation, the " legislation leaves middle-income families dangling without a safety net, jeopardizes families who currently have employer-sponsored health care, and gives employers a free ride ........a page out of the Newt Gingrich playbook for health care reform ". We just wonder exactly what is contained in the final signed version. While everyone pontificates over the broader ideological strokes, it's usually the fine print that kills the cat. The final veto version denies dental coverage ($75M) to adult Medicaid recipients because, 'it provides a service not offered by most Massachusetts employers', Governor Romney aptly (HUH?) noted. That gets right to the vanilla core of real healthcare reform issues. Call it 'Toothless Reform' , if you will. Newt, you're off the hook, 'cause maybe, this is a page out of the Wile E. Coyote 'Acme Rocket' playbook for healthcare reform? One thing for sure, if you want real reform, follow the money trail. Where it leads is where the real balance of power and core reform issues reside.]
globalEyeNews.tip.health insurance"


AFL-CIO: Press Releases, Speeches and Testimony

Statement by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney on Massachusetts Health Care Reform
April 05, 2006

Who would have thought that Massachusetts – long considered a bastion of progressive thinking – would take a page out of the Newt Gingrich playbook for health care reform? Forcing uninsured workers to purchase health care coverage or face higher taxes and fines is the cornerstone of Mr. Gingrich’s health care reform proposals. And it is unconscionable that Massachusetts has adopted this misguided individual mandate.

This legislation leaves middle-income families dangling without a safety net, jeopardizes families who currently have employer-sponsored health care, and gives employers a free ride.

The bill protects workers with the lowest incomes, but punishes middle-income families. A typical family in which the husband and wife each earn a little more than $30,000 and who have two children would be forced to purchase health care, but would not be qualified for any help even if their employer does not offer any coverage or they can't afford their share of the premium. With the average employer-sponsored insurance premium costing more than $4,000 a year for single workers and close to $11,000 a year for working families, Massachusetts' new requirement will bankrupt many middle-class families.

The state has promised to come up with an affordable health care plan but has been woefully short on details. While the state's promotional materials say, “everyone who can afford health insurance should be required to obtain it",it does not define affordable or provide any guarantees. Is it affordable for a single person making $30,000 a year to spend $3,000 (the amount currently being floated) on a stripped-down health care plan?

We believe that workers have to participate in the solution to the problem, but this plan puts the entire burden on workers while letting employers off the hook. Businesses that do not offer insurance will be assessed a paltry $295 per worker per year, an amount so meager that it actually creates an economic incentive for many businesses to pay the assessment rather than provide....More

The ' 90 foot Rule', Mass Delusion and Abolishing the Laws of Arithmetic

[ ' The elected leaders of Massachusetts have come up with a novel solution for the vexing problem of paying for health care: abolish the laws of arithmetic...' Alot can be made of ideology, universal health insurance coverage, common sense and political grandstanding. Notwithstanding, perhaps, heading up the list of common sense and the immutable laws of the universe is the absolute perfection baseball's 90 feet. Athough the origins of baseball have been steeped in controversy for over 100 years, one thing remains perfectly clear > baseball's flawless application of the laws of arithmetic has been the linchpin of the great American way of life throughout. Whoever it was that magically derived baseball's 90 foot basepath rule can be considered genius and should be. Considering the constant haps of razor close plays at first base throughout the course of a game, it would seem that even the slightest deviation from the magical distance, less or more, would have rendered the game impotent and historically irrelevant, as with most legistlation that has managed to pass through federal and state houses over this same period. Our suggestion, require the '90 foot rule', by law, to be adhered to in the political arena, with capitol offense fervor, when any attempt is made to address an issue concerning the well-being of the American way of life.]
globalEyeNews.tip.health insurance


EconLog: Issues and insights in economics

Mass Delusion on Health Care
Arnold Kling(April 7, 2006)



In today's Wall Street Journal, the author of a new book on health care policy writes (subscription required--free version here):

The elected leaders of Massachusetts have come up with a novel solution for the vexing problem of paying for health care: abolish the laws of arithmetic...

The Massachusetts health plan promises to provide health-insurance companies with subsidies in order to induce them to offer these low-deductible insurance plans. The arithmetic suggests that these subsidies will have to be large -- thousands of dollars larger than the $295 per worker that the state plans to collect from employers that do not provide health insurance.

The problem of paying for health-care coverage, which politicians are declaring they have "solved," is really just beginning. The only way to make zero-deductible health insurance available at low cost is with a large subsidy; how much will depend on negotiations with insurance companies.

The Massachusetts plan makes a large, open-ended spending commitment, while raising no new taxes, apart from a tiny $295 annual fee to be charged businesses for ......More


The+90+Foot+Rule

IBM Viewpoint: Reforming Healthcare: A Key Emerging Market For The 21st Century: "

[March 25, 2006] By even the most cursory analysis, America is obviously in the throes of a real healthcare crisis; a health care infra-structure that is in need of a whole new model . According tho this WebWire®release, IBM has positioned itself to provide significant impetus toward the transformation of America’s healthcare industry by spearheading a groundbreaking consortium of healthcare and health information technology organizations focused to develop a 21st century healthcare network. These efforts intend to address a dramatic flaw in a healthcare system plagued by underperformance according to worldwide comparison. More than 100,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors,adding up to up to more fatalities than from AIDS, homicides, and traffic accidents combined, according to this WebWire® release. "Lifesaving medical advances have not come accompanied by improvements in the way members of the healthcare ecosystem (from public and private payers, to providers, researchers and consumers) use IT to work with one another. As a result, the "system," such as it is, functions much like a fragmented cottage industry". A well documented recent study by the Rand Corporation supports this and reports, as well, that a modern healthcare IT infrastructure could save the industry and consumers up to $165 billion per year. Saving lives and saving money could be an "infectious" idea whose time has very much come to an ailing American health care system. Read on..... [globalEyeNews.brief.health insurance]

Press Release: WebWire®

IBM Viewpoint: Reforming Healthcare: A Key Emerging Market For The 21st Century



Armonk, NY - 07 Feb 2006: Healthcare is becoming as important to the vitality of businesses, governments and nations as it is to the well being of individuals. Soaring healthcare bills add $1,500 to the cost of every car made by General Motors, for example, compared to $200 per car for the company’s nearest foreign competitorIn fact, higher healthcare spending does not guarantee better delivery or outcomes. America spends 16 percent of its GDP on healthcare - the highest in the world - but ranks only 37th in the overall
performance of its healthcare system by the World Health Organization. Moreover, more than 100,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors. This adds up to more fatalities than from AIDS, homicides, and traffic accidents combined. Meanwhile, 45 million Americans have no healthcare insurance and 15 million are under-insured.

Many factors contribute to this healthcare crisis, from changing demographics to the spread of "diseases of affluence" and chronic illnesses. But perhaps the most treatable disorder is underinvestment in healthcare information technology. Lifesaving medical advances have not come accompanied by improvements in the way members of the healthcare ecosystem (from public and private payers, to providers, researchers and consumers) use IT to work with one another. As a result, the "system," such as it is, functions much like a fragmented cottage industry. This IT failure has been well documented in a recent study by the Rand Corporation, which concludes that a modern healthcare IT infrastructure could save up to$165 billion per year by reducing hospital stays, encouraging tests and early treatment, and cutting administrative costs.(1)

GROWTH AHEAD

The Rand study is part of a growing consensus that the healthcare crisis has reached a tipping point. Governments, businesses and patients can no longer tolerate the system’s spiraling costs. There is broad agreement that building a modern information infrastructure that ties together the healthcare ecosystem is the most readily available means to control healthcare inflation and improve delivery.

At the moment, healthcare IT spending averages just two-to-three percent of overall healthcare spending. This compares with as much as 12-15 percent in other information-intensive industries, such as financial services. Analysts forecast that, as countries address this massive underinvestment, healthcare IT spending will grow at a faster pace than overall IT spending. Gartner estimates.....Full Story>>>

More Middle-Class Families Enrolling Children in Public Health Insurance Programs: "

[March 11, 2006] It's not surprising that more and more 'middle-class' families are escaping to the financial refuge of publicly funded health insurance programs. With spiraling health insurance costs outpacing wages nearly four to one over the last few years, its no wonder. Every year household income levels that define the term 'poverty level' climb, narrowing the middle-class envelope, as many families poised on the brink plunge below the poverty line. Just a thought. [globalEyeNews.tip.child health insurance]



Kaisernetwork.org: - Daily Health Policy Report: Coverage & Access

More Middle-Class Families Enrolling Children in Public Health Insurance Programs



[Feb 15, 2005] An increasing number of middle-class families are declining employer-sponsored health coverage for their children and enrolling them in public health insurance programs, the Wall Street Journal reports. According to the Journal, SCHIP is the program most affected by the trend. In fiscal year 2003, SCHIP program enrollment increased by 9%, bringingthe national enrollment total to 5.8 million. The Journal reports that there is no one national figure that illustrates families' forgoing employer-sponsored coverage and their 'increasing reliance' on public insurance programs. However, a December 2004 study by the Employee Benefit Research Institute found that the proportion of U.S. workers with employer-sponsored health insurance fell from 74.4% in 2000 to 71.5% in 2003. In addition, over the last four years, the percentage of children covered through a parent's employer fell from 62.3% to 58.3% and at the same time, the percentage of children enrolled in a public insurance program grew from 20.9% to 26.4%. Many SCHIP beneficiaries could be covered through a parent's employer-sponsored health plan, the Journal reports. For instance.....Full Story>>> "