Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsMonday, June 8, 2009
Health Basic Health Rates Going Up
Posted by Eli Sanders on Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 4:52 PM
What happens when you cut the budget for Washington's Basic Health Program—which covers nearly 100,000 working poor residents of this state—by 43 percent?
We're about to find out.
According to the Washington State Health Care Authority, which administers the program, the possible routes for getting in line with the new, $238-million-lighter budget imposed by Governor Christine Gregoire were all bad. As Steve Hill, the agency's administrator, said today in a statement:
The options included providing coverage to only the lowest income members, cutting off members based on their time with the program, or a lottery.
A lottery.
Instead, what Hill came up with is a rate increase. Currently, those who make it in to Basic Health—the waiting list is some 30,000 people long—pay a percentage of the monthly premium based on their salary. Most people in the program pay around $36 a month, with the state picking up the rest of the $245 monthly tab.
Under the strategy announced today by Health Care Authority Administrator Steve Hill, the average enrollee will pay $61.60 [per month] in 2010. The $150 annual deductible will also increase to $250 on January 1, 2010.
Hill says this was the only way to keep from "arbitrarily" removing people from the program, and that he'll try to make more room in Basic Health by removing about 5,000 people from the program who are currently covered by Medicaid (and perhaps another 3,000 people who may qualify for Medicaid).
"We are fully aware that this decision will impact many people in the program," Hill said in the statement. "Even a $17 a month increase can be tough for a family struggling to get by. But this option gives those families a choice."
That is, if they have Medicaid coverage or can afford the rate increase. If not, there's not much of a choice except to join the more than 46 million Americans who are already living without health insurance.
Photo via Creative Commons and Flickr user Frankieb.
1
I'm still waiting for someone to point me to where The Constitution enumerates an inalienable right of The People to health insurance and invests The State with the authority to provide it...
2
Working poor?
Or system manipulating slackers with trust funds.
KOMO Crimestoppers asks the question !!!
Or system manipulating slackers with trust funds.
KOMO Crimestoppers asks the question !!!
3
When all people have access to comprehensive and preventative health care, then the society benefits. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
4
@1-- it's right there next to publicly funded roads, water, sewer, fire, police, court system ("if you cannot afford one, an attorney will be appointed for you), schools, etc.
You didn't actually think that your gas tax paid for the interstate freeway system, did you?
You didn't actually think that your gas tax paid for the interstate freeway system, did you?
5
Given that they will be cutting people, this is by far the best way to do it. The people for whom the plan is providing the most value will be more likely to work like hell to make their increased premium. Compare two people whose payment is going from $25/month to $75/month. If I have a chronic condition for which the drugs cost $250/month, I'll do scrimp and save as hard as I can to make my new higher payment. If I am a young, healthy hipster who took a dead-end part-time job so I could have more time for my music, I might well decide I'd rather spend the extra $50/month on drinks.
Of course it would be nice if everyone got free health insurance. It would be nice if everyone got a free pony, too. But given limited means and unlimited wants, ask any economist and he'll tell you the price mechanism has some very nice properties as an allocation algorithm.
Of course it would be nice if everyone got free health insurance. It would be nice if everyone got a free pony, too. But given limited means and unlimited wants, ask any economist and he'll tell you the price mechanism has some very nice properties as an allocation algorithm.
7
" If I am a young, healthy hipster who took a dead-end part-time job so I could have more time for my music, I might well decide I'd rather spend the extra $50/month on drinks"
I can't wait til they get forced into an insurance program by Obama and have to actually PAY for their insurance. They're gonna squeal like piggies when 20% of their barista/waiter/dipshit-at-kinkos income is taken away to pay for mandated health insurance.
Seriously, I've met these morons. They think universal coverage means they won't have to pay.
I can't wait til they get forced into an insurance program by Obama and have to actually PAY for their insurance. They're gonna squeal like piggies when 20% of their barista/waiter/dipshit-at-kinkos income is taken away to pay for mandated health insurance.
Seriously, I've met these morons. They think universal coverage means they won't have to pay.
8
60% of bankruptcies in 2007 were due to medical bills associated with chronic illness, up from 10% in 2001. And people want to trim away at the few health safety nets for those teetering on the edge. Somehow I don't think they're seeing the big picture...
9
I was on Basic Health in the '90s. After the initial application, never once did they check up on my income. For years I earned more than the maximum (sorry). I don't think they even asked me, let alone asked to see a tax return. Do they still operate that way?
10
Of course this means all those people who now will no longer have ANY health insurance will overcrowd the only options left open to them for medical care, namely free clinics & emergency rooms. One of the reasons our health care costs are so high as it is is because those of us paying for insurance have to subsidize individuals with no insurance who end up utilizing the MOST EXPENSIVE form of health service, which just happen to be hospital E.R.'s - which many don't go to until they're so sick that less expensive preventative care options are no longer viable.
This is what my grandpa used to call "penny wise and pound foolish"; too many people thinking "those poor people don't deserve health coverage", while failing to realize these people are already getting coverage at the highest possible cost, that they themselves are paying for regardless. So, the question really should be addressed as: if the insurance companies are going to soak the people who pay in order to cover the people who don't anyway, doesn't it make sense to get those non-payers connected to pro-active, preventative services that cost less, instead of continuing with the current broken system?
This is what my grandpa used to call "penny wise and pound foolish"; too many people thinking "those poor people don't deserve health coverage", while failing to realize these people are already getting coverage at the highest possible cost, that they themselves are paying for regardless. So, the question really should be addressed as: if the insurance companies are going to soak the people who pay in order to cover the people who don't anyway, doesn't it make sense to get those non-payers connected to pro-active, preventative services that cost less, instead of continuing with the current broken system?
11
I am on Basic Health. It's extremely minimal, bare bones, skeletal, but it's still a lifeline. I have diabetes and sleep apnea which will assuredly keep any private health insurer from covering me even if I could afford hundreds of dollars a month in premiums. On BH I can at least see a podiatrist, eye doctor, GP, and get lab tests partly covered by insurance when I need. WA is virtually the only state to have such a program; in most others we'd just be uninsured. Which I will be soon. I work full time, earning too much to stay on BH, yet I have no benefits. Gee, thanks free market.
The Health Care Authority was faced with having to slash BH slots--ration them, if you will. They've chosen to ration by ability to pay. All the options were awful. People should stop and think before getting apoplectic at the idea of a lottery; as crass as it is, there's plenty of precedent for it. Look at NYC's affordable housing.
Obama and Gregoire told us during the swine flu hype to stay home if we got sick. But without sick pay, you can't really do that. We need a basic, standard set of benefits mandated by law for all workers. That includes health care, child care, retirement, sick time, vacation time, and PAID family and medical leave.
The Constitution guarantees the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What kind of life or liberty can you have without health insurance?
The Health Care Authority was faced with having to slash BH slots--ration them, if you will. They've chosen to ration by ability to pay. All the options were awful. People should stop and think before getting apoplectic at the idea of a lottery; as crass as it is, there's plenty of precedent for it. Look at NYC's affordable housing.
Obama and Gregoire told us during the swine flu hype to stay home if we got sick. But without sick pay, you can't really do that. We need a basic, standard set of benefits mandated by law for all workers. That includes health care, child care, retirement, sick time, vacation time, and PAID family and medical leave.
The Constitution guarantees the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What kind of life or liberty can you have without health insurance?
12
One thing the state should do in the short term is open Basic Health to any Washingtonian willing to pay the full premium--no state subsidy. It's said to be in the $250-300/month range, but compared to buying insurance on the private market, that's still competitive. Moreover, BH would then have a bigger, healthier pool of beneficiaries and WA would have slightly fewer uninsured.
13
@12. That option would likely pull in only the sick or those who plan to use the coverage which would make things worse. Financially healthy insurance plans must have a larger number of healthy people who pay but don't use it in order to cover those who are/get sick.
14
My wife and I pay a combined ~$186/month for $5K deductible, 80/20 thereafter, 10K max-annual out of pocket coverage. This is insurance, not a zero-out-of-pocket pre-paid medical plan.
We could pay more for coverage, but don't, since the amount that we save by forgoing first-dollar coverage is more than sufficient to set money aside for routine care and/or non-catastrophic procedures/accidents. If it comes to it, I'd much rather borrow any expenses over the savings that we accrue in this manner than hand-over several hundred dollars a months to insurance companies on the off chance that we'll get it back in the event of a medical catastrophe.
Can most people afford pre-paid medical care plans with first dollar coverage? No. Can most people afford a medical insurance plan? Yes.
Transfer the tax deductibility from businesses to individuals, get rid of mandates that drive up the cost of care, tweak HSA's, and toss in sliding scale subsidies for those who are too sick or too poor to afford the premiums on their own. Presto - everyone's covered.
We could pay more for coverage, but don't, since the amount that we save by forgoing first-dollar coverage is more than sufficient to set money aside for routine care and/or non-catastrophic procedures/accidents. If it comes to it, I'd much rather borrow any expenses over the savings that we accrue in this manner than hand-over several hundred dollars a months to insurance companies on the off chance that we'll get it back in the event of a medical catastrophe.
Can most people afford pre-paid medical care plans with first dollar coverage? No. Can most people afford a medical insurance plan? Yes.
Transfer the tax deductibility from businesses to individuals, get rid of mandates that drive up the cost of care, tweak HSA's, and toss in sliding scale subsidies for those who are too sick or too poor to afford the premiums on their own. Presto - everyone's covered.
15
@12&13: Ha, this is exactly WHY universal health coverage is so competitive, and so effective. If every person in Washington paid the same health insurance, with company subsid (as they currently do) think of how cheap the monthly rate would be! Think of all the people we could cover, and lives we could improve!
16
Many fall through the cracks- and each crack is different- but trying to fit 300 million into one universal system??!! It will ration and limit care and those whose like it are grateful for Crumbs! and hurt the weakest amongst us people! If you care give these people money! Think global. Care local. Fund Hospitals.
17
Basic Health. That is where America is headed with Obama.
As Washington's Basic Health Shows - Christine wants praise for giving - but is quick to take it back when she and other state employees' fat cat retirement programs are threatened by budget cuts.
Double insurance premiums for those poor suckers - no problem for Christine.
Double co-pays when someone goes to the doctor - no problem for Christine.
End all state payments for vaccinations for children on medicaid or basic health - no problem for Christine.
Ask Christine to eat some of the losses in the state retirement system the way all private employees have had to eat losses in their retirement accounts - now we have a problem.
Turn your health care over to Christine and her crowd and you will see how quickly they pull the plug and let you die without health care you need if it inconveniences them in ANY WAY.
Who wants Christine or Obama or one of their minions to have the power of life and death over your family members on a day to day basis ???
As Washington's Basic Health Shows - Christine wants praise for giving - but is quick to take it back when she and other state employees' fat cat retirement programs are threatened by budget cuts.
Double insurance premiums for those poor suckers - no problem for Christine.
Double co-pays when someone goes to the doctor - no problem for Christine.
End all state payments for vaccinations for children on medicaid or basic health - no problem for Christine.
Ask Christine to eat some of the losses in the state retirement system the way all private employees have had to eat losses in their retirement accounts - now we have a problem.
Turn your health care over to Christine and her crowd and you will see how quickly they pull the plug and let you die without health care you need if it inconveniences them in ANY WAY.
Who wants Christine or Obama or one of their minions to have the power of life and death over your family members on a day to day basis ???
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (18) RSS