Near the end of "Health Care I," I put up a link to Politifact.org. That link wasn't working so I am re-posting another link here for PolitiFact.org
Hopefully this one will work!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Blogging
I have to say that I enjoy having a blog and the process of blogging! But it is still a learning process. Clearly, my blogs about special ed issues are the easiest to produce as they are personal and, during the school year, they affect my day to day and week to week life. I recently added a tool that when I write something, it will give me other sites that I can link to, but I've found that all of the sites that it recommends are other opinion sites; usually I am look for fact sites, so I haven't found it to be very helpful. I have been trying to find a counter tool as I have talked to numerous people who follow my blog, but aren't willing to sign up as a follower...even an anonymous follower! I had something on earlier, but it tracked where people signed on from - "Leesburg, Facebook; Timbuktoo, Google" and the like. I'm not interested in where people live, and even less interested in having it actually show up in live time on my blog, so I've removed it and am still looking for something that will give an idea of how many folks check out the blog on a regular basis. So if you see weird things appear and then disappear, don't be intimidated. I'm just trying to find tools that will help me to do this better.
I pretty much consider myself to be politically moderate as I can split a ticket with the best of them, so I follow a variety of blogs - especially local blogs. There is an advantage to listening to what all sides have to say on specific issues, so I may put up a box with the blogs that I follow. You might be surprised at what I check out most days! If you have suggestions of blogs that might be interesting, feel free TO MAKE AN ANONYMOUS COMMENT and let me know (hint, hint on the comments thing...I'd rather have a dialogue than post a journal).
Thanks to Ms Giggles for helping me to post the You Tube video in the previous post. I only hope she can do something with my actual, outdated sewing website tomorrow before she leaves on Friday to go back to school.
Will give an update on my beloved kids soon.
I pretty much consider myself to be politically moderate as I can split a ticket with the best of them, so I follow a variety of blogs - especially local blogs. There is an advantage to listening to what all sides have to say on specific issues, so I may put up a box with the blogs that I follow. You might be surprised at what I check out most days! If you have suggestions of blogs that might be interesting, feel free TO MAKE AN ANONYMOUS COMMENT and let me know (hint, hint on the comments thing...I'd rather have a dialogue than post a journal).
Thanks to Ms Giggles for helping me to post the You Tube video in the previous post. I only hope she can do something with my actual, outdated sewing website tomorrow before she leaves on Friday to go back to school.
Will give an update on my beloved kids soon.
When is Bipartisan Reform, not Bipartisan?
Well, I haven't tried this before, but this piece of video from the Rachel Maddow show last night pretty much sums up where we are on bipartisan health care reform. Let's see if I can actually post it here.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Health Care IV
continued from Health Care III, below
If I don't make better progress on this, I'm going to have to ask my teacher friends to help me with the roman numerals, lol!
Next statement:
Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
If I don't make better progress on this, I'm going to have to ask my teacher friends to help me with the roman numerals, lol!
Next statement:
Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
My Response: The commissioner will establish plan standards, along with other duties including establishing and operating the health insurance exchange. I think the second one is more important than the first, but.... If your employer offers you a choice, there will be different insurance companies offering plans at three different levels as was stated before, essential, enhanced and premium. If you have Medicare now, you do not have a choice now. This accusation is misleading.
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
My response: THERE IS NO MENTION OF ILLEGAL ALIENS AT ALL! This statement is a lie.
From FactCheck.org:
I think I need to take a little break and compose myself. But before I do I want to remind you of how I started this series of postings:
Wayne Lauten is a good friend of mine and if he says he has read the first 500 pages of the “health bill” then he has.
Guess Wayne Lauten isn't such a good or honest friend of Dad-in-law. Sad, just sad.
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
My response: THERE IS NO MENTION OF ILLEGAL ALIENS AT ALL! This statement is a lie.
From FactCheck.org:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered
One Republican congressman issued a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare," and we’ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They’re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don’t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don’t offer it.
"Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" July 23
– by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig
Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.
My response: This section is a listing of goals for financial and administrative transactions. The real change noted here about health plan beneficiary ID cards is that they may be machine readable for accuracy. It is not a National ID Health card; if you have Medicare, you will have a Medicare card; if you have Blue Cross/Blue Shield, you will have a BC/BS card; if you have Aetna, you will have an Aetna card. This statement is incorrect and misses the point of the paragraph.
Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
My response: This section allows for electronic funds transfers so that the entire billing process can be automated. In other words, when your health care provider submits an electronic bill, they can now be paid electronically. This has nothing to do with health care consumers. This statement is incorrect.
Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
My response: OMG, while researching this question I ran across this entire list of "highlights" on this paper posted by Liberty Counsel. It is adapted from this blog post from Peter Fleckenstein. And is also posted on FreeRepublic.com.
Here is the beginning of what is posted on FreeRepublic:
Health Care Bill Summary From Peter Fleckenstein’s Twitter Account: http://twitter.com/fleckman
Peter Fleckenstein’s Twitter Account ^ | July 24, 2009 | Peter Fleckenstein
Posted on Friday, July 24, 2009 12:45:47 PM by COUNTrecount
CONGRESSMAN____________________________________
If you aren’t going to read the entire HealthCare bill, here is a summary:
PG 22 MANDATES the Government will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
PG 24 Line 116 Government effectively sets prices for ALL private health plans.
PG 30 Line 123 THERE WILL BE A Government COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
PG 37 Line 132 The Government will be reviewing grievances about themselves and will decide on appeals for rejected claims.
PG 29 Line 4-16 YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!! Additionally you can reference PG 15 Line 19-25.
PG 42 The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HealthCare Benefits for you. You have no choice!
PG 50 Line 152 HealthCare will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
PG 58 Government will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a National ID HealthCare Card will be issued!
PG 59 Line 21-24 Government will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer!
I think I need to take a little break and compose myself. But before I do I want to remind you of how I started this series of postings:
Guess Wayne Lauten isn't such a good or honest friend of Dad-in-law. Sad, just sad.
Health Care III
Happy Sunday!
Again, here is a link to H.R. 3200 so you can look up these pages for yourself.
The e-mail begins:
My response: No one has voted on anything yet; will let you decide if this is "unconstitutional."
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
My response: Pages 21 & 22 mandates a study of the insured and self-insured employee health care markets. Studies are done to gather information or test a hypothesis; audits are done on data after something is done. This is incorrect.
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
My response: This entire section speaks to the cost-sharing of insurance. Cost-sharing is the paying of deductibles, coinsurance and co-payments (not premiums). This limits the cost-sharing to $5000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. This is not rationing of health care, but specific dollar limits placed on the out of pocket expenses of consumers. This is incorrect.
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
My response: This section establishes a Health Benefits Advisory Committee. The committee will recommend covered benefits and the elements of three types of plans: essential, enhanced, and premium. In other words, someone has to decide what is in the "essential" or basic plan so that consumers and businesses can compare apples to apples. This is to aid in implementation of contents of the bill, this is not addressing any coverage issues a consumer may have after they have purchased their insurance. This is incorrect.
Sorry, but I have a party to attend, so I'll let you chew on these few and be back later. Enjoy your afternoon!
As a reminder, I am responding to an e-mail that my father-in-law forwarded to me from someone who supposes to be highlighting the negative effects of the first 500 pages of H.R. 3200, the house bill on health care reform. I posted the entire e-mail in Health Care I and began discussing the comments that Dad-in-law made. In Health Care II, I continued and also included descriptions of some of the terms being thrown around. I am now going to start addressing the actual e-mail highlights.
Again, here is a link to H.R. 3200 so you can look up these pages for yourself.
The e-mail begins:
Subject: A few highlights from the first 500 pages of the Healthcare bill in...
A very frightening prospect, but this is what some idiots have voted for.
My response: No one has voted on anything yet; will let you decide if this is "unconstitutional."
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
My response: Pages 21 & 22 mandates a study of the insured and self-insured employee health care markets. Studies are done to gather information or test a hypothesis; audits are done on data after something is done. This is incorrect.
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
My response: This entire section speaks to the cost-sharing of insurance. Cost-sharing is the paying of deductibles, coinsurance and co-payments (not premiums). This limits the cost-sharing to $5000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. This is not rationing of health care, but specific dollar limits placed on the out of pocket expenses of consumers. This is incorrect.
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
My response: This section establishes a Health Benefits Advisory Committee. The committee will recommend covered benefits and the elements of three types of plans: essential, enhanced, and premium. In other words, someone has to decide what is in the "essential" or basic plan so that consumers and businesses can compare apples to apples. This is to aid in implementation of contents of the bill, this is not addressing any coverage issues a consumer may have after they have purchased their insurance. This is incorrect.
Sorry, but I have a party to attend, so I'll let you chew on these few and be back later. Enjoy your afternoon!
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Health Care II
OK, to pick up from where I left off, I guess I need to address my father-in-law's final phrase of comments in the e-mail that he forwarded:
(2) I happen to be happy with my insurance and medical treatment – and really do not know anyone just now who is complaining – most folks who have worked are satisfied maybe the cost of insurance has gone a tad high but then so has milk.,..
Dad, come on, you are a federal retiree and on Medicare; you live near a large, renowned medical center. Of course you're happy! But do you know this about us: when our beloved ALM started with his current company (based in Europe) a couple of years ago, they did not have health insurance available for their American employees. We had to self-insure and these were our costs: 1) $900 a month for me, Ms Giggles and Little Dude, 2) $500 a month for ALM (Floggy was working full-time and had his own employee sponsored plan). So, $1400 a month, a $600 per person deductible and NONE of our pre-existing conditions were covered - at all, including medications! NOT MY IDEA OF A TAD HIGH!
But what does an exclusion for pre-existing conditions really mean? Well first of all any physician appts for those conditions would not be covered. Neither will blood/lab tests nor any procedures. With a history of high blood pressure and high cholesterol would they have paid for the care if ALM had happened to have a heart attack? They would have certainly done everything in their power to relate it to a pre-existing condition and therefore deny coverage. So, unless one of us had an accident or a serious illness that was NOT at all related to anything we had ever had before, this was not really health insurance, but emergency insurance.
I don't know what you pay for prescriptions with the new Medicare (unfunded) drug plan, but here are some examples of ours. WITH health insurance, Tricor is $50 a month; I got a new RX from the dermatologist for an ointment for my psoriasis, she gave me a coupon for $50 off the first tube and I still had to pay a co-payment. When it's gone, I can't afford to refill it! And as far as coverage and treatment are concerned, there is this: Little Dude's lack of visual motor integration is nearly curable with occupational therapy, but our private therapy had to end in December of 1st grade when the insurance wouldn't pay for it anymore. We are now at the mercy of the school system, who doesn't seem to think that providing the appropriate treatment and eliminating this problem (and the corresponding annual costs related to eventually providing him with a laptop computer) is directly related to his academic performance, so what he gets is piecemeal. Great health care delivery system there - not!
Deep breath.
Before I get to meat of the e-mail and it's descriptions of what the bill says, I think it might be a good idea to define what we are talking about.
Universal Coverage - This, of course, means that everyone is insured. Universal coverage is mandated by the states for auto insurance and we all pay a premium for "uninsured motorist." Since citizens aged 65 and older are all covered by Medicare, the insurance companies do not have to provide coverage for the demographic group that utilizes the most services. Imagine the cost of your auto insurance if the highest risk group, ages 16-25, were covered by a government administered "Motoristcare" program! Mandating that young people have health insurance would bring down the costs for all of the rest of us as they are the most healthy group of our population; the cost of services would be spread out among a larger group. And when they do need care, it would not be "uninsured patient" care that the rest of us end up paying for anyway.
Socialized Medicine - In it's purest form, this means that government provides for everything and the entire health care delivery system is controlled by and paid for by the government. Doctors are employed and paid by the government; hospitals are owned by and run by the government (think VA hospitals). There is no option on the table that provides for government take over of hospitals and doctors offices. This will not happen.
Single Payer System - For those 65 and older, Medicare is a single payer system; Everyone is covered by health insurance through the government. Implementation of a single payer system would essentially be providing Medicare for all citizens. I would imagine that younger, working citizens would have to pay premiums that would "save" Medicare from going "bankrupt."
Public Plan Option - A Medicare type plan that would be one option for consumers, and possibly small businesses, to choose as their health insurance plan. A good description of the public plan option approach is available here at TheHealthPolicyCenter.org.
Medicare - A Universal Coverage, Single Payer, Public Plan for US citizens aged 65 and above.
I'm running out of time here and wanted to start on the list of highlights. I thought I could pick out a dozen or so and just dismiss them right off, but every time I review the list, I have comments to make that there is no longer time to do at this sitting. So, I will revisit the list tomorrow until we make it through the pages.
Have a healthy night!
Dad, come on, you are a federal retiree and on Medicare; you live near a large, renowned medical center. Of course you're happy! But do you know this about us: when our beloved ALM started with his current company (based in Europe) a couple of years ago, they did not have health insurance available for their American employees. We had to self-insure and these were our costs: 1) $900 a month for me, Ms Giggles and Little Dude, 2) $500 a month for ALM (Floggy was working full-time and had his own employee sponsored plan). So, $1400 a month, a $600 per person deductible and NONE of our pre-existing conditions were covered - at all, including medications! NOT MY IDEA OF A TAD HIGH!
But what does an exclusion for pre-existing conditions really mean? Well first of all any physician appts for those conditions would not be covered. Neither will blood/lab tests nor any procedures. With a history of high blood pressure and high cholesterol would they have paid for the care if ALM had happened to have a heart attack? They would have certainly done everything in their power to relate it to a pre-existing condition and therefore deny coverage. So, unless one of us had an accident or a serious illness that was NOT at all related to anything we had ever had before, this was not really health insurance, but emergency insurance.
I don't know what you pay for prescriptions with the new Medicare (unfunded) drug plan, but here are some examples of ours. WITH health insurance, Tricor is $50 a month; I got a new RX from the dermatologist for an ointment for my psoriasis, she gave me a coupon for $50 off the first tube and I still had to pay a co-payment. When it's gone, I can't afford to refill it! And as far as coverage and treatment are concerned, there is this: Little Dude's lack of visual motor integration is nearly curable with occupational therapy, but our private therapy had to end in December of 1st grade when the insurance wouldn't pay for it anymore. We are now at the mercy of the school system, who doesn't seem to think that providing the appropriate treatment and eliminating this problem (and the corresponding annual costs related to eventually providing him with a laptop computer) is directly related to his academic performance, so what he gets is piecemeal. Great health care delivery system there - not!
Deep breath.
Before I get to meat of the e-mail and it's descriptions of what the bill says, I think it might be a good idea to define what we are talking about.
Universal Coverage - This, of course, means that everyone is insured. Universal coverage is mandated by the states for auto insurance and we all pay a premium for "uninsured motorist." Since citizens aged 65 and older are all covered by Medicare, the insurance companies do not have to provide coverage for the demographic group that utilizes the most services. Imagine the cost of your auto insurance if the highest risk group, ages 16-25, were covered by a government administered "Motoristcare" program! Mandating that young people have health insurance would bring down the costs for all of the rest of us as they are the most healthy group of our population; the cost of services would be spread out among a larger group. And when they do need care, it would not be "uninsured patient" care that the rest of us end up paying for anyway.
Socialized Medicine - In it's purest form, this means that government provides for everything and the entire health care delivery system is controlled by and paid for by the government. Doctors are employed and paid by the government; hospitals are owned by and run by the government (think VA hospitals). There is no option on the table that provides for government take over of hospitals and doctors offices. This will not happen.
Single Payer System - For those 65 and older, Medicare is a single payer system; Everyone is covered by health insurance through the government. Implementation of a single payer system would essentially be providing Medicare for all citizens. I would imagine that younger, working citizens would have to pay premiums that would "save" Medicare from going "bankrupt."
Public Plan Option - A Medicare type plan that would be one option for consumers, and possibly small businesses, to choose as their health insurance plan. A good description of the public plan option approach is available here at TheHealthPolicyCenter.org.
Medicare - A Universal Coverage, Single Payer, Public Plan for US citizens aged 65 and above.
I'm running out of time here and wanted to start on the list of highlights. I thought I could pick out a dozen or so and just dismiss them right off, but every time I review the list, I have comments to make that there is no longer time to do at this sitting. So, I will revisit the list tomorrow until we make it through the pages.
Have a healthy night!
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]">Health Care I
Well, I said I was going to address the health care situation, and since the discourse has reached the level of lies by members of congress and screaming by voters at members of congress, it's time I actually wrote something on the topic.
I recently received the following e-mail from my father-in-law:
Subject: A few highlights from the first 500 pages of the Healthcare bill in...
A very frightening prospect, but this is what some idiots have voted for.
Contact your Representatives and let them know how you feel about this. We, as a country, cannot afford another 1000 page bill to go through congress without being read. Another 500 pages to go. I have highlighted a few of the items that are downright unconstitutional.
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
Now I am going to go through these items, but before I do, here is the link for House Bill 3200. This is the pdf format so that you will have the same page numbers as those referenced above.
First of all, let me address my father-in-law's comments.
I do not know nor care how you voted but I certainly do hope if you voted for the “ONE” that you have by now come to your senses. Look at some ‘problems’ HE has not correctly addressed: (1) 46 million uninsured. Only if you count all illegal; all y young folks who for one reason or another have decided they don’t need insurance just yet. If the GVT wants to give health insurance to ALL who CANNOT AFFORD IT I have no objection and I do not think that number (maybe 10 million) will break the bank.
From factcheck.org:
Q: | How many of the uninsured are U.S. citizens? I have heard there are 47 million people without health insurance. How many of these are U.S. citizens? What is the makeup of the remainder? |
A: | The vast majority of the uninsured are citizens from working families.  The "47 million uninsured" figure is from the 2006 U.S. Census Bureau report. In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that the number actually declined somewhat, to 45.7 million people under 65 (the age of Medicare eligibility). Ever since health coverage became a major issue in the 2008 presidential campaign, we've received periodic questions from readers who wonder whether a large percentage of the uninsured are non-citizens or illegal immigrants. They're not. According to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, 79 percent of the uninsured are native or naturalized U.S. citizens. The remaining 21 percent accounts for both legal and illegal immigrants. Kaiser does acknowledge that non-citizens are more likely to be uninsured than citizens, because they are often restricted from public coverage and "are more likely to have low-wage jobs and work for firms that do not offer coverage." (Around 60 percent of Americans have insurance through their employers.) According to the Census Bureau, 43.8 percent of non-citizens are uninsured, versus only 12.7 percent of native-born citizens and 17.6 percent of naturalized citizens. But saying that non-citizens are more likely to be uninsured is not the same as saying that most of the uninsured are non-citizens. What else can we say about the uninsured? More than 80 percent are from families in which at least one person works (70 percent from families where at least one person works full-time, and an additional 12 percent from families with a part-time worker). Two thirds are near or below the poverty line, making less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level. Only a small number (20 percent) are children, but nearly half are below the age of 30. Non-Hispanic whites make up two thirds of the population but less than half of the uninsured, and they are also more likely than any other race to have private insurance. The Kaiser Family Foundation has released a report, incorporating 2007 Census data, that covers these and other characteristics of the uninsured. -Jess Henig |
Again from FactCheck.org:
Claim: Many of the uninsured are young people who think they're invincible. The National Review Institute writes: "More than half of the uninsured are between 18 and 34 years of age, a group which has relatively few expensive health issues and for whom self-insuring (paying their own medical bills) makes sense." Actually, only about 40 percent of the uninsured are between 18 and 34, according to the Census.
Is this younger group uninsured by choice? KFF said young people lack insurance for a variety of reasons: "Many low-income young adults lack access to affordable private coverage since few are full-time students or full-time employees, few have jobs that offer employer coverage, and few have access to coverage through their parents."
Similarly, the Institute of Medicine reports that "adults who decline offers of [employer-sponsored insurance] ... are more likely to be in poor health with high-cost medical conditions." So those who turn down available coverage don't always do so because they're in great health and don't want to pay for it. Many find it to be unavailable, or can't afford it at the price offered.
Claim: Many of the uninsured can afford private health care. About 9.1 million of the uninsured have household incomes greater than $75,000, and 10 percent (about 4.7 million) make more than 400 percent of the federal poverty threshold, according to KFF. In 2007, the most recent year of Census statistics, a family of four at 400 percent of the poverty level would have a household income of $84,812 or more.
So it's true that many of the uninsured could, in theory, spare the $3,354 average annual employee contribution for employer-sponsored family coverage, or even the $5,799 average premium for individually purchased family coverage. But it's also true that 66 percent of the uninsured make less than 200 percent of the poverty level according to KFF, which is less than $42,406 for a family of four in 2007. And a family's premium costs may actually be much higher than the average for individually purchased insurance, depending on the number of dependents, the ages of family members, their state of health and the state in which they live. For instance, the average annual premium for individually purchased family coverage in Massachusetts, according to America's Health Insurance Plans' Center for Policy and Research, was $16,897 in 2006-2007 (before the state changed its insurance plan), and in New York it was $12,254.
Furthermore, even those who can afford coverage cannot always get it. AHIP found that 72 percent of 2006 applications for health insurance were eventually approved, while the rest were withdrawn, not processed, or denied for medical or non-medical reasons. And of those who got coverage, 11 percent had to pay a higher rate than requested.
Claim: Many of the uninsured already are eligible for public coverage. That's true – NIHCM found that in 2006, 12 million of the uninsured were eligible for Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (formerly SCHIP) but were not enrolled. These were disproportionately children – 6.1 million of the 12 million are under the age of 18, versus only 20 percent of the uninsured as a whole. NIHCM posits a number of possible explanations: People may be unaware of the programs or not know how to enroll in them; they may experience administrative hurdles to enrolling or staying in the program; or they may fear the stigma of public assistance. Some states also periodically institute CHIP enrollment caps, which may keep eligible people out of public programs. Utah, Georgia and Florida all had caps in 2007.
Is this younger group uninsured by choice? KFF said young people lack insurance for a variety of reasons: "Many low-income young adults lack access to affordable private coverage since few are full-time students or full-time employees, few have jobs that offer employer coverage, and few have access to coverage through their parents."
Similarly, the Institute of Medicine reports that "adults who decline offers of [employer-sponsored insurance] ... are more likely to be in poor health with high-cost medical conditions." So those who turn down available coverage don't always do so because they're in great health and don't want to pay for it. Many find it to be unavailable, or can't afford it at the price offered.
Claim: Many of the uninsured can afford private health care. About 9.1 million of the uninsured have household incomes greater than $75,000, and 10 percent (about 4.7 million) make more than 400 percent of the federal poverty threshold, according to KFF. In 2007, the most recent year of Census statistics, a family of four at 400 percent of the poverty level would have a household income of $84,812 or more.
So it's true that many of the uninsured could, in theory, spare the $3,354 average annual employee contribution for employer-sponsored family coverage, or even the $5,799 average premium for individually purchased family coverage. But it's also true that 66 percent of the uninsured make less than 200 percent of the poverty level according to KFF, which is less than $42,406 for a family of four in 2007. And a family's premium costs may actually be much higher than the average for individually purchased insurance, depending on the number of dependents, the ages of family members, their state of health and the state in which they live. For instance, the average annual premium for individually purchased family coverage in Massachusetts, according to America's Health Insurance Plans' Center for Policy and Research, was $16,897 in 2006-2007 (before the state changed its insurance plan), and in New York it was $12,254.
Furthermore, even those who can afford coverage cannot always get it. AHIP found that 72 percent of 2006 applications for health insurance were eventually approved, while the rest were withdrawn, not processed, or denied for medical or non-medical reasons. And of those who got coverage, 11 percent had to pay a higher rate than requested.
Claim: Many of the uninsured already are eligible for public coverage. That's true – NIHCM found that in 2006, 12 million of the uninsured were eligible for Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (formerly SCHIP) but were not enrolled. These were disproportionately children – 6.1 million of the 12 million are under the age of 18, versus only 20 percent of the uninsured as a whole. NIHCM posits a number of possible explanations: People may be unaware of the programs or not know how to enroll in them; they may experience administrative hurdles to enrolling or staying in the program; or they may fear the stigma of public assistance. Some states also periodically institute CHIP enrollment caps, which may keep eligible people out of public programs. Utah, Georgia and Florida all had caps in 2007.
Here's another group that does fact checking; I like their "truth-o-meter: PolitiFact.com
This is already really long, so I'm going to post it, run a few errands and be back soon. Post your comments!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c57c9fb1-6410-4960-afbc-5fc302f8c622)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
