Insight, analysis & opinion from Joe Paduda
One of the more puzzling arguments against universal coverage is that advanced by the worthies at the Cato Institute. They argue that if insurance companies could just charge people based on their risk profile, the market would solve the problem of coverage.
I don’t follow the logic.
Continue reading ‘Free markets’ in health insurance just don’t work
Medicare’s admin expenses are not really that much lower than private insurers’. Before single-payer advocates start accusing me of being an industry shill, check out the facts.
One in five voters named health care as the issue of most concern to them in a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll: while health care is the top domestic issue, it is well behind Iraq as THE top issue.
But it isn’t ‘just’ health care; the poll data tells a much richer story about what voters want from Presidential candidates, and how they feel about the present contenders.
IMO there are three health care reform “have tos” – universal coverage, a consistent benefit plan, and community rating.
Here’s where the Democratic candidates stand on each. This is a synopsis, a cheat sheet; some of the candidates have nuanced positions that don’t lend themselves to this type of quick and dirty review.
Continue reading Health care reform – Where the Democratic candidates stand
Richard Eskow doesn’t like mandated coverage – and for a lot of good reasons.
Where I think Richard misses the mark is that without mandated coverage we have cost-shifting on a grand scale, along with the myriad other problems that go along with uninsurance – lousy care of chronic conditions being among the worst.
Continue reading Mandated coverage – a (very) brief pro and con.
After immersing myself in the Democratic candidates’ speechifying, policy papers, interview transcripts, and others’ opinions about same, here’s my take on what health care reform should do.
We’ll get to where each candidate stands on each “requirement” tomorrow. Much as I’d like to include the GOP guys, to date there’s been precious little on health care from anyone on that side of the aisle.
After Edwards and Obama and Richardson, Sen. Clinton hit the stage this morning. Here’s what she had to say about health care reform.
Here is the case for single payer. Not saying that I agree with it, but here it is. Before you roll your eyes and click on “delete”, take a minute to consider the perspective of the single payer advocate.
I’m sitting in the only formal session of Take Back America dedicated to health care. The moderator, Roger Hickey of the Campaign for America’s Future, noted that the number one or two issue in most polls concerning election issues is health care. This being a policy conference, and health care being a key policy issue, one would think that there would be more than one session on health care, and that the panelists would include luminaries such as Paul Ginsburg of the Center for Studying Health System Change, Uwe Reinhardt, Karen Davis of the Kaiser Family Foundation, or Bob Laszewski of Health Policy and Strategy Associates.
That’s not the case. Even more puzzling, none of the panelists or attendees asked the key question – can Medicare control cost? I address that central question at the end of this post.
I don’t envy any pol who has to speak after Barack Obama, even if you are as accomplished a speaker as John Edwards. Despite the difficulty, Edwards acquitted himself admirably.
Now onto the topic we’re all focused on; where Edwards is on health care.
Think Bob Seger at a UAW picnic. Don Ho at a luau. Lawrence Welk at a retirement home. Toby Keith at Daytona.
Sen. Barack Obama’s just finished his speech at Take Back America, and it had all the excitement, electricity, and fervor, minus the ‘tiny bubbles‘. But never fear, your trusty correspondent didn’t get swept up in the hysteria, and maintained focus on the important question – does his health care reform platform make any sense?
