Has to be public option
Over the past five years, I have had the challenge of looking for health insurance. While working full-time for a company, the health care provider canceled the policy because there were too few participants over too large a geographical area, rendering the plan unprofitable. I enrolled in a private plan while I changed employers. After three months, I joined that company's health plan.
The same health care company provided all three plans. The private plan that I was compelled to buy cost twice as much as the company plans, even though the deductible was much higher. I have learned that the health insurance industry's first priority is profit, not my well-being.
Rates continue to rise to maintain profits while the number of Americans covered continues to decrease. Eventually, this vicious circle will end with the collapse of Health Street similar to the Wall Street fall. The public option will keep the health insurance industry earning a reasonable profit.
U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe has not endorsed the public option. She has received generous support from the health care industry over the course of her government service. I respect her, have voted for her, written letters to the editor in support of her. But I find it hard to justify her position when her constituents are overwhelmingly in favor of the public option by a factor of better than two to one. I hope she re-evaluates her position.
Without the public option, there is no health care reform.
Ron Russell, Auburn
Nursiemom says
Another issue not discussed here is the abysmally deficient job that's being done to oversee provider fraud. I spent some years as a "benefit integrity" (ie: fraud) investigator with Medicare; too often we find providers who bill insane fees for questionable care and items. A great example is the Florida company currently in the spotlight for billing hundreds of dollars to Medicare and third party payors for "arthritis packs", which consist of a heating pad and some instructions. Without a greater ability to enforce practices, we can legislate ad infinitum and costs will not go down for the consumer. It is not entirely the fault of Medicare, which is actually run by regional fiscal intermediaries working on contract to Medicare. There needs to be a much larger focus on enforcement, with the funding, staff, and tools to do the job. this also includes judges to back them up; the "slap on the wrist" mentality exists everywhere...
When Blue Cross/Blue Shield first began, it was a non profit entity. the novel, and sensible, concept of "Insurance" was the pooling of risks, thereby creating an equitable and affordable premium for all. There were young an healthy in the pool, as well as older and more health compromised. In time, the younger would age and become more fragile, the new youth in the group would continue to balance the risk at both ends of the spectrum. It was not driven by stockholders and high paying executive salaries. Now the companies, to encourage higher profits, seek to hand pick the insured by ruling out those in more fragile health (which we need to remember, can be any of us in a heartbeat), or charging them unaffordably high premiums and copays. We no longer have "Insurance", we have a lucrative investment.