People in the US are worried about a lot of things, but apparently
the top one is whether, and how, they are going to be able to pay unexpected
medical bills. The chart below, based on an August, 2018 survey, is provided by
Drew Altman, President of the Kaiser Family Foundation, in the September
24 Axios. Indeed, concern about medically-related costs come in not
only as #1, but as #2 (health insurance deductible), #4 (prescription drugs),
and #6 (monthly health insurance premium), making up 4 of the top 8 concerns,
all of them ahead of “rent or mortgage” (#7) and “food” (#8). All 8 of these
concerns are upsetting; it is outrageous that over one-third (37%) of Americans
are very or somewhat worried about being able to afford food, or 41% rent or
mortgage. But a twice as many people, two-thirds, 67%, are very or somewhat
worried about being able to afford unexpected medical bills, and over half
(53%) about their health insurance deductibles.
They certainly do include the poor, including many who are
members of minority groups; those who, even in the best of circumstances are
barely hanging in there – or often are not. These are the folks for whom paying
for housing and food is an all-consuming concern, who do not know where their
next meal may be coming from. For them, extraordinary medical bills are not
even something that they can spend time worrying about, although they would
certainly not be able to afford them.
Those worried, however, also include the large percentage of
Americans (see the numbers) who are not poor, but are not all that far from it,
people who are not that many paychecks from homelessness (a good measure of
real risk). These are people who do not qualify for Medicaid (especially in the
states that have not expanded it under the ACA), do not yet qualify for
Medicare (and even many of those who do), and who often have health insurance
either through their employers or through the ACA marketplaces. The employer
health plans, overall, are cutting back on benefits, increasing employee
contributions (#6), requiring higher deductibles (#2), and even instituting
lifetime caps on benefits as well as excluding many times of illnesses.
Fortunately for these people, the ACA has important requirements that help
protect them: that people with “pre-existing” conditions be eligible for health
insurance (without that, many folks with chronic disease would not be covered),
and that there be “community rating”, which means insurance companies can’t
charge individuals with particular conditions many times more than they charge
others (without which most folks wouldn’t be able to afford the premiums).
It is also true that the current administration and Congress
have been trying very hard to limit, when they cannot repeal, these very
protections that provide a minimum safety net for most Americans. They are also
keeping up a drumbeat about the “cost” of programs such as Medicaid (it’s just
poor people, after all, except it is also your elderly parents and grandparents
in nursing homes, and this is the bulk of the cost), Medicare (a bit of a
“third rail” in politics, but which lots of Republicans keep bringing up as needing
to have its benefits cut), and even Social Security, the program that keeps
many, many American seniors from being in real poverty even as it continues
them in near-poverty. The fear of losing insurance because of having a
pre-existing condition is, scarily described by Kurt
Eichenwald in a NY Times Op-Ed on October
16, 2018.
The fear of #1, “unexpected medical expenses” is, I assume,
primarily about getting sick when you weren’t planning on it. Most folks are
not hoping to get sick, but for some the exposure is particularly great because
part of the way they handle #6, monthly health insurance premiums, and #2, high
deductibles, is not be either uninsured or poorly insured. The latter is
particularly common, both in many employer plans and even in ACA individual
plans. Indeed, while they call it something different (“free choice” and “granting
Americans the freedom to buy health care across state lines”[1]),
the administration and Congress are actively encouraging high-deductible,
low-coverage policies. This makes premiums seem affordable (or more affordable),
but is a disaster when someone gets sick (back to #1).
In addition, limited
networks are a quicksand trap for many people, who try to carefully go to doctors
and hospitals that are in their networks, only to find themselves faced with
huge bills from emergency room physicians, specialists, surgical assistants, and
lab and imaging services that are not. This is truly a kind of “gotcha”, a
quicksand trap. It is unbelievable; or maybe it is too believable. What may be
more unbelievable, to many Americans, is that in most other developed countries
health care systems are designed to serve people’s health, not trick and
bait-and-switch for the purpose of corporate profit.
Medicare, as currently structured, is not a panacea; 31% of
US seniors go without health care because of cost. But it is much better than
nothing, and could be really good if it was better funded, and for-profit
insurers were not skimming the “cream” (the least sick) into
Medicare Advantage plans (which have much higher overhead/administrative costs
than traditional Medicare).
Sadly, the issue of whether Americans should have adequate
and affordable health care has become highly partisan. This is in some part
because at least a portion of the Democratic Party has moved to positions in
support of health care as a right, and a universal health insurance system
(such as Medicare for all). But it is much more because the Republican Party
has moved into complete opposition to any plan to expand health coverage to
more Americans (e.g., Medicaid expansion, ACA) and is actively and aggressively
moving to cut funding for ACA, for CHIP, for Medicaid, and even for Medicare (“we
can’t afford it” is the stated reason, although it really means “we can’t
afford it while giving multi-trillion-dollar tax cuts to corporations and the
wealthiest”).
Sadder is the fact that many of those most affected, many of
those with the greatest worries about health costs, whether unexpected illness,
high deductibles, high prescription drug costs, high premiums, are reliable
Republican voters. The
Associated Press published a piece describing how the Democrats are focusing on
health care for the midterm elections, citing the senate race in my state,
Arizona. It describes how the Republican candidate, Martha McSally
(currently my congressperson) tries to talk with business executives about the
tax cuts but is regularly interrupted with questions about health care:
‘They
are asking about Democratic ads saying McSally, currently a congresswoman,
supported legislation removing the requirement that insurers cover people with
pre-existing medical conditions.
"It's
a lie," McSally said quickly, accustomed to having to interrupt a
discussion of the tax cut to parry attacks on health care. But she had voted
for a wide-ranging bill that would have, among other things, undermined
protections for people with pre-existing conditions and drastically changed and
shrunk Medicaid.’
Actually, then, it is she who is lying. Hopefully she, and
other GOP legislators, will pay a price because people vote for those who are
actually trying to solve their health
care problems, regardless of party. We can hope that more and more Americans will, at least on
this important issue, stop voting against their own interests.
I hope.
[1]
This is actually the phrase used in the “survey” – completely non-scientific
and filled with leading or directive questions – that Trump sends out to his
supporters.
1 comment:
We also need to be pressuring more democrats into fighting as hard for affordable healthcare as the republicans are fighting to make it un-affordable. While you do mention that some democrats are taking the "healthcare is a human right" stance, far too many democrats are (in my opinion) just as guilty as the republicans dismantling the healthcare system, because they are complacent, they don't want to fight for affordable healthcare hard enough.
Post a Comment