|
Frequently
Asked Questions
Why
is single payer less expensive?
Because with a
multi-payer system, each insurance company and payment source needs to be billed.
Each insurance plan needs to be analyzed to check if a procedure is covered.
Each company also pays their CEO's and top administrators high salaries. They
pay for advertising, marketing, lobbying, and other wasteful administrative
costs.
At the same time,
each doctor, hospital, nursing home, or pharmacy needs to hire legions of billers,
plan analysts and reviewers to accommodate the multiple payers. In addition,
each employer offering health benefits needs to expand their human resource
department to spend time negotiating with a multitude of insurance plans for
rates and coverage.
It is estimated
by many national and local studies that up to 60% of administrative costs would
be saved if a single payer system were implemented. Two studies commissioned
by the Massachusetts Medical Society in 1998 found that under a Single Payer
system, enough money would be saved in Massachusetts to enable the state to
provide comprehensive health coverage for all residents. Click here for a summary
of the studies: USPHC Studies Summary. To read the actual studies, click here
for Boston University School of Public Health Study; click here for Lewin Group
study.
Will
Universal, Single-Payer Health Care raise taxes?
We will be paying
out of a different pocket, but each of us should end up paying no more in taxes
than we pay now out of pocket. Most of us pay for at least part of our health
insurance along with co-pays, deductibles, medicines etc. We currently pay taxes
for health care for all local and state employees.
Doesn't
getting rid of the businesses making a profit from health care mean a loss of
low middle level workers?
Yes. That is why
our bill includes money for retraining and job relocation.
How
would the public agency collect the money?
This depends on
the legislation and negotiations that will take place in the statehouse.
MASS-CARE
supports a bill called the "Massachusetts Health Care Trust Fund",
S.755. Currently a bill to create an Advisory Committee to consider these questions
has been passed by the Joint Health Care Committee.
Much work needs
to be done to determine the best and fairest way to collect the billions of
dollars now being spent on health care in Massachusetts and to eliminate legal
barriers to the bill.
Instead of paying
for health care through employers or from out of pocket, we may find it better
to substitute a health premium formula or tax that reflects current spending.
Perhaps a public
insurance fund would be created to collect current premiums on a fair basis.
Or perhaps a plan similar to the Social Security tax would be instituted.
Whatever is eventually
decided, the method would replace, not add to, the health care dollars currently
being spent. It would also lower the total amount currently being spent.
But
can our state do this alone?
Yes. The Canadian
system started in one provide (Saskatchewan). Massachusetts can be the example
for other states and the nation as it was for the Children's Health Insurance
Program. We will need federal waivers for ERISA, Medicare, and Medicaid, and
will need support from our Congressional delegation. Rep. Tierney has a bill
in Congress that would provide this support.
Is
the government to inefficient and bureaucratic to run such a large program?
No. Under a universal,
single-payer program, all the current private and public bureaucracies would
be streamlined into one. The patchwork of programs and plan with their own eligibility
requirements, billing processes, competition, advertising, etc., would be just
one plan to simply pay all providers for all residents for all medically necessary
care. As for efficiency, Medicare spends 2% of its budget for administration,
compared to 14% to 45% by private health insurance companies.
Does
the Canadian system work?
Yes. All reliable
polls show that Canadians are much happier with their care than we are with
ours. they live longer, have healthier babies, and pay less than half what we
do for health care, and all residents are covered. Less than 0.1% of Canadians
get the medial care in the US - and they are mainly "snowbirds" who
live here in the winter.
What
can I do to help?
Click
here to find out.
|
