
There are two areas of concern. The first is what would a universal plan do to an already over regulated and under staffed health care system? The second has to do with the makeup of 47 million uninsured number.
Back in 1980, a study commissioned by the Department of Health and Human Services predicted that there would be a surplus of doctors by the year 2000. That disastrous prediction resulted in reductions of openings in medical schools and a diversion of young people to other professions. Other governmental regulations literally drove United States trained foreign doctors, who used up some of those medical school seats, back to their homeland, further draining our physician resources. And the medical shortage isn’t limited to doctors. According to an article by Dr. Jack Cochran in the Denver Business Journal, the Government is now predicting a shortage of 800,000 nurses by 2020. Recruitment of doctors and nurses has become a big business. Doctors fresh out of their residency are receiving over fifty job offers each.
If John Edwards were to implement his medical wish list…
…, he would collapse the system.
Forty seven million uninsured is a staggering number. It is certain to make people sit up and listen, and in many cases, nod their head in agreement that “something must be done”. Of course, to Democrats, that something is universal health care, provided by the Federal Government – the same government that predicted we would have a surplus of doctors and nurses. Let’s look at the numbers.
First, people over 65 years of age, and others who have been on Social Security disability for 24 months, are enrolled in the Medicare insurance program. The forty seven million uninsured are comprised of nine million children and thirty eight million adults, of working age, who are available to compete for jobs in the work force.
The birth rate in the United States is 2.1 children for each family unit, which equates to an estimated 8.6 million parents of those 9 million children. Therefore, we have 8.6 million family units, which include the nine million children, and 29.4 million single people; a total of 38 million uninsured “units“ that are eligible to work.
According to the National Coalition for Healthcare, nearly 40% of the uninsured, slightly over fifteen million people, reside in households with income of $50,000 or more. It seems reasonable to expect that people with income of $50,000 or more should be able to find an insurance plan within their economic reach; even if it is a high deductible plan.
The other 60%, just under twenty three million eligible workers, live in households with incomes of under fifty thousand dollars. However, it is undetermined how many of these lower income units/workers qualify and receive medical, drug, and dental coverage under Medicaid or other benefit programs. For example, New Hampshire’s Healthy Kids program provides access to insurance programs for each child in families with relatively low income. A family of four with income up to $3,184 per month, receives health insurance coverage for each child at no cost. Households with income over $3,184 up to $4,303 per month, pay a $25 per month premium for each child. The household income then goes up to $5,163 per month and the per child premium is only $50 each month.
The unemployment rate has been running about 4.2% to 4.6%. If we multiply the 22.8 million uninsured units by 4.4%, we find there are approximately one million “unemployed” units, and 21.8 million “working” units, with incomes under fifty thousand dollars. It is worth noting that in a study published in 2002 by the Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco, while there were cyclical changes, and severe recessions inflated the numbers, on average, people were unemployed for between twelve and fourteen weeks. The one million unemployed are essentially “turned over” about once a quarter.
It is also worth noting that those who become unemployed, and who have had a health insurance plan through their employer, are eligible to continue their health insurance under what is called “COBRA”, for an extended period of time, anywhere from eighteen to thirty six months. The unemployed person must pay the premiums and the former employer is allowed to charge a small administrative fee for maintaining the account; generally no more than 5% of the premium.
According to the National Coalition for Health Care (NCHC), about sixty percent of all businesses offer some sort of health care plan. It would therefore be reasonable to assume that 14.6 of the 21.8 million workers have healthcare available to them but, for one reason or another, do not choose to purchase one. Likewise, the remaining 7.2 million workers whose companies do not offer a health insurance plan, have elected to not purchase a plan for themselves.
Again, the NCHC estimates that only a little over thirty percent of the 18-24 year old age group chooses to buy health coverage, and almost a third of the Hispanic ethnic group is without health coverage.
There are probably myriad reasons for the choices these workers have made – many of them are young and believe they are invincible. Some want to use their money for other things. And some feel the cost of an insurance plan is too high. Many of those who think a plan would be too costly may not have explored what is called “catastrophic coverage”, which is simply a less expensive plan with a higher deductible.
What results is that one million unemployed people may need some form of health care assistance for the period of their unemployment.
The question then becomes, do we want the government take over and change our entire health care system in order to provide coverage for one million (temporarily) unemployed workers, and 7.2 million workers who live in households with income under $50,000, who work for companies that do not offer a health insurance plan, who may or may not be receiving other medical coverage assistance, and who choose not to purchase a healthcare plan?
In the United States in general, and New Hampshire in particular, we are fortunate to have an excellent health care system. We should think twice before we jeopardize it. And we should ask the politicians a few probing questions about why we should risk changing the system, and for whose benefit.