The Commonwealth Fund is a private foundation that researches health care issues. In their study, "Building Blocks for Reform: Achieving Universal Coverage with Private and Public Group Health Insurance" (Health Affairs, May/June 2008), The Commonwealth Fund's Cathy Schoen, Karen Davis, and Sara R. Collins present a new health reform framework, built on the current U.S. mixed private–public system, that "provides a pathway to universal coverage with a minimal increase in total national spending and relatively modest net federal budget costs." The authors estimate the plan would insure 44 million of the estimated 48 million Americans currently lacking health coverage.
Or read an article about it in the U.S. News & World Report:
Many agree there is a need for change to our health care system, a need for universal coverage but there is a lack of consensus on how to provide and finance such an expansion. The Commonwealth Fund report offers a realistic approach, and one to seriously consider.
OK Joie we know about your health care agenda. Your last 4 posts were all about it. Whats your idea to fix it?[QUOTE=6t5frlane]OK Joie we know about your health care agenda. Your last 4 posts were all about it. Whats your idea to fix it?[/QUOTE]
I don't think my "health care agenda" is that different than most people. We need something better than what we have, an affordable, quality and efficient health care system. I'm not an expert on the issue, like the average person I'm concerned about how "reform" would affect what I have now, but I know for moral, economic, practical reasons we need a system that covers all Americans.
There are a lot of ideas to fix health care out there. Its a complex issue. So I read. That's one advantage in having had disabling RA for 31 years, I'm not physically able to do much. So I read. Health care is an issue that personally affects me and all of us here on the board, so I share not only my opinions, but also information I find. I'm growing impatient with our government not dealing with health care. So I bring up the subject here on the board, post articles or studies about health care, to perhaps generate interest, discussion, foster a belief and confidence that we can do better. I believe an informed, energized public can push for change and our government must respond. Naive? Maybe, but what alternative do we have?
As I read the various health care reform proposals, I realize there are a lot of options. I'm realistic, what will the public accept? What would be a sustainable system? How do we pay for it? As I said earlier, I'm not an expert, all I know for sure is that we need to fix health care that is costing more and leaving more people out. We need to cover all our citizens, other countries do it, why can't we?
I can't tell from your post, if you are genuinely interested in my opinion or if you are annoyed with my generally single subject posts. If its the latter, I will discontinue posting if there is little interest or negative responses.
Aw, Joie, keep posting. 6T5 is just trying to pick a fight. His agenda is to squash anyone's initiative to make the world a better place. Fortunately for the rest of us he's spectacularly ineffectual. Actually I noticed that Joie had posted several threads on the subject without her opinion on it. I was curious and she replied quite nicely.Thanks Joie. Ignore GAG Man, suddenly it feels like last year. Time to move on, 6T5.Flashback? Drugs can cause all kind of reactions. They gotta have clinics up there in CanadaNow you guys - seriously - I just thought 6t5 was asking.
I'm really leaning towards - gasp! - socialized medicine. See I said it! I feel so....free!
My reasoning - taking the profit out is the only thing thats going to get us our 'cure'. Pharma profits. Insurance company profits that keep then with billions by denying our claims. I do think there should be profits for the 'inventors' of the meds - but now to the obscene levels we see to day. Heck, just taking the cost of advertising out of the equation will free up valuable resources for real research.
The only thing I'd do differently is pay MD's a LOT more so they're not induced to become hedge fund managers instead of docs. I'm serious - 500K a year looks like the average on the list Nikkilyn posted. So be it! The docs get money and they're no longer bought.
In my daily wanderings on the internet, I came across this. The Commonwealth Fund is a nonpartisan, research group who've put out a lot of interesting studies on health care in the US and health care systems in other countries. So, to me, I find them reputable.
What I found hopeful about this report, is that their health care proposal would cost less than what Clinton and Obama's proposals would cost. Concern over cost is a big roadblock to universal care, that undermined the passage of California's health care plan. We had a budget shortfall of billions, so that tabled any movement for health care reform.
In this report everyone has to give a little. Employers would have a pay or play mandate. If they don't provide insurance, they have to pay into a pool that would. Small businesses, the uninsured, and the self-employed would gain coverage through a new national insurance that would offer a choice of public and private plans. Low income folks would be subsidized. Middle-high income folks would get tax credits. Everyone would be required to participate. There's a lot more to this proposal, so I hope readers will take a few moments to look over the summaries listed in the first post.
The Building Blocks approach builds and improves upon existing sources of insurance."It offers a pathway from the current fragmented insurance system to one that is more integrated and efficient." It's a pragmatic approach, but personally, I like the idea of a single payer system, would seem to be more cost effective if you do away with for-profit insurance companies. This may not be realistic though, the insurance industry would put up a formidable fight and it's too foreign of a system for the public to readily accept. Just my opinion.
Pip, Thanks. I was asking. Gimp was just starting her usual trouble. I think it boils down to money. Who is going to pay and can " we " afford it. All 3 of the candidates have their ideas. But even if elected after whatever promise they make it will be a long hard road to implement[QUOTE=Pip!]
I'm really leaning towards - gasp! - socialized medicine. See I said it! I feel so....free!
[/QUOTE]
Shssssss. . . don't say that word. It scccccares people, and shuts down conversation and momentum for change. But between you and me, what do you mean? I think true socialized medicine is government administered, funded through taxes, with doctors and hospitals working for the government. Is that what you support? I think, at the moment, I'm inclined to a single payer system (no for profit insurance companies) with private docs and hospitals, regulation of drug industry (negotiation for drug prices) Funding?? not sure, perhaps a combo of individual, employer and gov contributions.
There's a lot of possibilities, as I learned from watching "Sick Around the World." For example, Germany has universal coverage and still has nonprofit insurance companies, Germans have their choice of 200 plans. Switzerland has universal coverage and keeps drug prices affordable by negotiating w/drug companies, and these companies are still thriving, still have money for research and development. The UK emphasizes preventive care, doctors are paid bonuses if they keep their patients (those w/diabetes, heartdisease) healthier. Taiwan uses a "smart card" with patient info for billing purposes which cuts administrative costs drastically. The most important thing is that in the 5 countries examined in this PBS program is that all citizens are covered and these countries pay 8 to 11.6 percent of their economy on health care -- in the US we pay 16% and leave out 47 million. And in those countries, NO ONE is denied insurance because of a pre-existing condition and no one ever goes bankrupt because of medical bills. And these are democratic, capitalistic countries. We can do better.
[QUOTE=6t5frlane]I think it boils down to money. Who is going to pay and can " we " afford it. All 3 of the candidates have their ideas. But even if elected after whatever promise they make it will be a long hard road to implement[/QUOTE]
The reform proposal referenced in my first post would cost less to implement than the current presidential candidates proposals. An excerpt:
"The estimated net effect on total national health spending is minor," say the authors, with an increase of less than 1 percent, or billion dollars, in 2008. Expenses related to covering the newly insured and providing improved coverage would be largely offset by lower administrative costs and a net reduction in provider reimbursements. Federal budget cost in the first year would be .7 billion."
I think its also important to note that we cannot afford to do nothing. Health care costs are expected to double by 2016. Emergency rooms are overcrowded with the uninsured seeking basic health care there. More and more Americans have difficulty paying increasing premiums, copays and out of pocket expenses. The number of uninsured grows. And for those with no access to health care, a lower quality of life (less productive worker) and for some an earlier death.
When legislation for Social Security in the 30s and Medicare in the 60s was passed, these systems weren't set up over night, and that will be the case with health care reform. But where is our courage and confidence? It's time for the US to take its place among the other industrialized nations in the world that have universal coverage, its the economical and practical thing to do, and morally right.
JOie, What do we do with the Millions of Illegal 's here. The cost is Billions spent every year. Would they be covered for free?They already are; aren't they?I guess thats the point. Lets start by deporting them. Also change the " Anchor baby " law. It's crazy. If an illegal has a child on US soil it's a citizen of there parents country of origin. Imagine the money saved. [QUOTE=6t5frlane]JOie, What do we do with the Millions of Illegal 's here. The cost is Billions spent every year. Would they be covered for free?[/QUOTE]
The original subject of this thread was a realistic health care proposal by the Commonwealth Fund that built on our current system and provided health insurance coverage for all AMERICANS -- citizens. You need to read the report to see if and how they address the issue of health care to illegal immigrants.
Our federal government has not dealt with immigration reform, and I choose not to discuss this subject either on this health related forum. I do not see illegal immigration issue as the reason why we do not or cannot have universal coverage. There have been special interests groups that have blocked universal health coverage during the administrations of Clinton, Truman, and FDR and we did not have immigration issues then.
The issue of illegal immigration is a very polariing and divisive subject, and should not be allowed to derail a conversation about health care reform, a major concern of Americans. Can we focus on what is possible rather than why reform is not possible? Have you read the summary of the Commonwealth Fund report? Have you seen the PBS program, "Sick Around the World"? They offer some insight into what is possible.
6t5 -
I understand the cost of illegals but dealing with that is a different battle. There is going to be a cost to this, no matter what, but what is the cost if we don't? Think about it. People divorcing to avoid bancruptcy. What's the cost to families? 1 out of every 6 American's have an AI disease - what's the cost in lost 'productivity' from a government standpoint? Thats a heck of a lot of people not paying taxes.
You know what scares me the most - Clinton was almost destroyed by Pharma and the Insurance companies a decade back - yet now she's moderate. This is going to be a long UGLY fight to get us taken care of. How many of us have paid in and when we need the system it's not there for us...under the guise of pre-existing condition or whatever?
I like Joy's posts as she tells me about options I didn't know I had. When it comes time to vote...and the time is coming...I'll be an informed voter and will know more about who is looking out for my best interests. Such as it is.
Joy -
I didn't say you were for socialized medicine - I said I was! Ooooh, the freedom!
Seriously, you forget about the Swiss and how they managed to stay so profitable in that doc. By selling their meds in the unregulated American market. That was the most chilling thought in that entire show to me. They know it's easier to dump that stuff here - knowing they can't use it there.
So, yes, non-profit insurance companies. Hospitals non-profit. The only hospitals pretty much not in the red in the US ARE the non-profits, according to something I read in the LATimes. MD's paid huge salaries. And to be even more 'LIBERAL' regulate the heck out of Pharma. And dump the FDA! There I said it! We need to start from scratch with their ties to corporate funding and research. They're supposed to be PROTECTING us.
How much does anybody want to bet that if we went more socialized - American Ingenuity would surface and we'd find the cure in a decade. That's a lot of money the NIH spends on research - if it was looking for a 'cure' instead of 'therapies' - we'd have it.
Hugs,
Pip
Sorry Joie if we got a little off track but the issue of Nationalized Health Care is also a very polorizing issue. Illegal Immigration is also a Major concern of many Americans and they do have a great impact on the finances here in the USA, which in turn can affect health care. Look at how many Hospitals have closed in California. AS far as whats possible I do not know. This is a very complicted issue and again it's about money. Who can afford what and who is going to pay for it. I have not seen the PBS show. 6t5 -
You can still view it online - and I think they have a transript. Just Google "Sick around the World" - Frontline, wasn't it Joy? It was amazing. My first thought about the Smart Cards is - hey, we've got credit cards and ATM's all over the US - we could do this in a heart beat and cut costs by gazillions of $$$. Which would be....more money for our cure!
Do you think I'm obsessed with the cure?
Hugs,
Pip
Pip,
I know you weren't saying that I was for socialized medicine. I was just making a point, that word "socialized medicine" has a stigma, some think if we go down that road we'll all soon be calling each other "comrade." Actually, I think its a scare tactic exploited by those who have the most to lose from health care reform -- insurance companies, drug companies. Socialized medicine is universal care, but universal coverage is not socialized medicine, universal coverage can be attained many different ways. For those interested, see the website for "Sick Around the World" which examines 5 democratic, capitalistic countries and their universal health care ysystems. You can view it online or read about it there.
6t5:
Why should health care reform be a polarizing issue? Don't we all want affordable health care for ourselves and our families? Aren't we all in agreement that our current system ain't working? Is there someone undermining the publics confidence in health care reform? Maybe the insurance companies and drug companies that are handsomely profitting at a time when everyone else is scrambling to pay bills. The "Harry and Louise" tv ads that were so successful in eroding the publics confidence in Clinton's health care plan was financed big time by the insurance industry.
Yes, its a complicated issue, thats why I post the info I do, we need better info than the info fed to us by the media which is controlled by corporate interests, its not you and I paying for tv ads, commercials, that keep these so called "news" and talk shows on the air, the public airwaves, ha!
Yes, its a multifaceted issue, there's the issue of illegal immigrants, but there is the bigger issue of administrative costs, which claims over 20% of health care dollars, lotsa paperwork, when you have a multitiude of employer based group insurance plans, small group plans, individual plans, Medicare, Part A, Part B, Part D, Medicaid (or in Calif MediCal), SCHIPS, plans for military and their families, care through the Vets Administration.
And yes, "it's about money" but shouldn't it be a matter of priorities? Y'know all those folks in the Capitol dragging their feet on health care reform have health insurance courtesy of you and me, taxpayers pay 70% of their health insurance premiums. Shouldn't every American have access to affordable health care?
There's this person on another board I post on who has to go without meds - she's choosing one of the biologics (Rituxin, Remicade???) and isn't qualified for financial assistance. So either she GETS A LOAN for her meds or she does without. I think the quote we K a year. And I'm thinking, I've got to go 40+ years on meds.
14K X 40 years = 0K is my share for the rest of my life? But if I get disabled, the government is going to pick up that tab. Otherwise, I have to. How many of us have 0K laying around in the bank to pay for our lifetime meds?
0K X 2.1 million RA sufferer's = 1,176,000,000,000 according to my calculator. Because I'm not a math wiz - doesn't that really say 'gazillions of dollars. Who has that amount for all of us lying around. I don't. That's more than the national debt, I think. And every report I've seen says that 2.1 million of us number is slated to rise as the population ages. Hmmmm.
And that's only for one med - how many of us are multiple meds?
1,176,000,000,000 to get 2.1Million of us 40 years. THIS IS WHY NOBODY IS LOOKING FOR THE CURE. IT'S SIMPLE ARITHMETIC!
Pip who assumed she spelled arithmetic correctly
Edited to add a K for 1000 in.
Pip!2008-05-14 14:19:12 [QUOTE=6t5frlane] Pip, Thanks. I was asking. Gimp was just starting her usual trouble. I think it boils down to money. Who is going to pay and can " we " afford it. All 3 of the candidates have their ideas. But even if elected after whatever promise they make it will be a long hard road to implement[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to mind paying for this war. Whats the problem with affording medical care for all americans at a cost all can afford?Oh, and 6t5, my solution for the war??? Bring them home.
Just some disconnected thoughts as I procastinate from cleaning my closets.
We do not have a health care system, we have a health care "industry," remove or restrict the for profit angle and redirect that money to health care delivery.
Something like 75% of health care costs are for the treatment of chronic diseases and a big percentage of that are for preventable diseases, so access to health care for regular checkups and treatment and an emphasis on prevention would in the long run be cost effective. Despite spending more money than other industrialized countries w/universal coverage, the US has poorer health outcomes.
At this point, the Iraq War is projected to cost nearly trillion. Just think of the health care for Americans that trillion could have provided.
Well, I better start on my closets, but as our Governor Arnold Schwartznegger said, "I'll be back."
Joie, I want to thank you for posting your topics. This is a topic we all need to keep up on.
I also want to point out that it is up to each and every one of us, and it is our responsibility to take care of our own health. The system in place does not practice prevention. They are very catastrophic oriented. If we have diabetes, high lipids, obesity, or any other preventable problem, it is our responsibility to take care of these problems. We have one of the highest rates of obesity on the planet which drives up the cost of health care. Not only do we need a new system, we need to start focusing on disease prevention. [QUOTE=lorster]Joie, I want to thank you for posting your topics. This is a topic we all need to keep up on.
I also want to point out that it is up to each and every one of us, and it is our responsibility to take care of our own health. The system in place does not practice prevention. They are very catastrophic oriented. If we have diabetes, high lipids, obesity, or any other preventable problem, it is our responsibility to take care of these problems. We have one of the highest rates of obesity on the planet which drives up the cost of health care. Not only do we need a new system, we need to start focusing on disease prevention. [/QUOTE]
I agree Lorster. Take care of yourself and do not rely on the Government. That said I would advise anybody to use any program that is offered. Disease prevention is a subject that you never hear about. Now Lorster and Joie do you really want to start a discussion here about any War? I thought that you Joie wanted to stay on topic and now you want to change the subject. Let me know so I can respond to the very naive answer from Lorster.
6t5, you were talking about "affording it". I was commenting that you don't seem to mind paying for the war, but you can't "afford national health care" Joie made a great point of what the war is costing and how much health care that money "could have" provided for americans. That was my point. That money all comes from one big pot. It needs to be divied up a bit differently. And I brought up the billions spent on Illegal Immagrants and how it relates to health care. Maybe start another tread if you wish on Military spending Good morning everyone. Having a heat wave here in California, several consecutive days of 100 degrees, so won't have the energy or focus to take on another controversial subject, the Iraq War. But, 6t5, it does relate, because as you pointed out, how to pay for a plan that covers all Americans is going to be a challenge, epecially given the financial cost of this war and the increase to our national debt.
Lynn posted a WSJ article about health costs bite into family budgets. An excerpt:
"... between payroll deductions for premiums and their portion of medical bills, employees now foot about 40% of the cost of their employer health plans, Milliman’s actuaries say.
Another red flag: drug spending is picking up again, increasing by 10.6%, after slowing the past two years. Milliman says look for that trend to continue. The last wave of generics for popular drugs has already worked much of its savings magic. Meanwhile, pricey biotech and specialty drugs are adding more to drug costs.
How much more health-care spending employers and employees will be willing to bear is uncertain. But one thing is for sure, says Lorraine Mayne, a Milliman principal and consulting actuary: “This is likely to increase pressure on the next presidential administration to address health-care costs.”
That comment about "pricey biotech" drugs make me nervous, for I take enbrel. There is a trend in insurance, which began w/Medicare Part D, to categorize specialty drugs (like some biologics) as Tier 4 drugs. Rather than copays, the cost of these drugs to the insuree would be 20 to 30% of the actual cost, so a drug like enbrel could cost 0 to 0. Also consider, these drugs are for chronic conditions, so unless a cure is found, most likely I'll be taking this the rest of my life. So should there be more regulation of the drug industry, its not like they are selling soap, folks need their meds to live productive lives. Shouldn't the fed gov negotiate for lower drug prices for Medicare Part D (they currently are prohibited due to successful lobbying by the drug industry).
The link below is to an AP article, 51% of insured Americans take prescription drugs and most likely that will increase. How will this contribute to health care costs? Drugs do help people, but does the drug companies heavy advertising contribute to a "pill society"?
From the article:
"Medication use for chronic problems was seen in all demographic groups:
_ Almost two-thirds of women 20 and older.
_ One in four children and teenagers.
_ 52 percent of adult men.
_ Three out of four people 65 or older."
"... Epstein noted the biggest jump in use of chronic medications was in the 20- to 44-year-old age group — adults in the prime of life — where it rose 20 percent over the six years. That was mainly due to more use of drugs for depression, diabetes, asthma, attention-deficit disorder and seizures."
"Dr. Sidney Wolfe of Public Citizen's Health Research Group said the increased use of medications is partly because the most heavily advertised drugs are for chronic conditions, so most patients will take them for a long time. He also blames doctors for not spending the time to help patients lose weight and make other healthy changes before writing a prescription."
Wouldn't it be cost effective, to emphasis and promote prevention and wellness programs, to perhaps keep people off a life time of meds for preventable health conditions? However, in order to do this, you need access to affordable care, thus a need for health care reform, a more efficient, effective and equitable system.
The economic state of our country presents a challenge as to how to pay for and deliver universal health coverage, but there are many proposals being discussed and explored. We need to keep an open mind to the possibilities.
So Joie only the Iraq war relates to healthcare and no other subject? I was trying to keep on topic as you wished but apparently you cannot [QUOTE=6t5frlane]So Joie only the Iraq war relates to healthcare and no other subject? I was trying to keep on topic as you wished but apparently you cannot [/QUOTE]
Ah, MisteR 6T5frlane, you disappoint me. I thought you were interested in having a discussion about health care which for many Americans and especially those of us with RA, which I have dealt with for 31 years and will probably have to for the rest of my life, is a major concern and critical issue.
Your point was taken (I was writing my response offline while you and lorster were having your exchange) I'm surprised you attack me for not staying on topic, when the majority of my previous post pertains to health care. Perhaps you are having a bad day, everyday is a rough day for me since I cannot walk without a brace or walker, but I try not to take it out on other people.
I want to talk about and explore solutions to the looming health care crisis our country is facing. If you find my posts of no value, or irrational, or however, you perceive them w/your myopic viewpoint, then please, simply do not respond to my posts.
Joie, I find the topic at hand " HealthCare " very interesting and of concern to many. " Attack You " Wow those are strong words . When I mentioned " Illegal Immigration " you found the subject inappropriate but apparently the War is Ok ?? I even said " sorry " if I was going off track . So lets talk about solutions and leave the war out of it if you can. As mentioned in my first post today, I'm dealing with a heat wave here in California - 4 consecutive days of 100 degree weather. Its very stressful for me, cuz its caught me unprepared, and I have not hired a handyman to set up my swamp cooler. So perhaps I'm a little testy today. But yes, strong words or not, I felt you were attacking me, accusing me of not staying on topic, when 99% of my post was about health care. And now, in your last post you snidely say, " So lets talk about solutions and leave the war out of it -- if you can. " Most of my posts deal w/RA issues or health care issues, I have seldom posted about the war, yet the one comment, the cost of the war and its impact on providing health care, is what you choose to focus on. 6t5frlane~Are you male or female? I guess since you haven't corrected anyone you are indeed male; but I don't know why I always thought you were female. I suppose it's because the majority here are. I feel like you only brought up the subject of getting off subject because someone got on you about that on this very thread. I didn't think you were "attacking" anyone anymore than you were being "attacked" earlier. Sadly when you have an opinion that differs from some they see that as an attack. Goes both ways on this forum and other's that are simular. It's often really hard to understand the meanings of some peoples words.....and other times it's crystal clear.
I think if there was a ban on pharmaceutical advertising on TV it could go a long way toward helping the bring down the cost. The cost of those commercials is absoluetly outrageous. No doubt they pass that cost on to the consumer. I'm curious how effective they actual are anyway. I mean; I'm on two medications I see advertised on a regular basis (At least 10 times a week!) and neither of those drug did I "Ask my doctor if they were right for me". He prescribed them. I didn't go in and say "Hey doc; I keep seeing this medication called Humira advertised. Maybe I should give that a try. Is it right for me?"
Ok, I'm the one that mentioned the war. I was not trying to change the subject, but war...and immigration do fit into the equation. All of these things affect how much we can spend. My problem is that priorities are all messed up here. We spend entirely too much money in one area, and not enough in another. This election has been at the front of the news...everyday...since the 2006 election. It does not seem that anything else is getting done. Everything else is such a mess, it will take the rest of my life for the future administration to fix the problems of the past 8 years. Some days I really do not believe it will ever get fixed, no matter who gets in. I guess my glass is half empty...or nearly empty when it comes to the current economic problems we face as a country. 6t5. I want to say something to you about immigration. I am on the same page as you when it comes to the cost. I'm appalled that not only are these people entering illegally in huge numbers, but also that americans are hiring these illegals. But I do have a problem with any health care system in our country that would turn a sick person away that entered the hospital, or any other health care facility. The hospital I work at takes everyone regardless of their status or ability to pay. Now, that is the america that I am proud to live in. Many of these hospitals simply write off the bill that these people do not pay. There are also many americans (born and legal) that do not pay their bill. Why are you not critisizing these people? It all adds up. Don't think that just illegals are responsible for the health care crisis in america. Here is another problem. We have a young man from Thailand right now that has TB. Entered our country with it. Works for a fast food resteraunt here. No insurance. Who foots the bill for him? Do we turn him out in the street so he can go back and infect others? Or do we put him on a plane? We treat him...and pay for it so that he is not a spreader of TB. My solution for illegals? We buy Mexico and incorporate them into our economy. We are good at spreading democracy. Lets do so in Mexico. Kill two birds with one stone. What do you think 6t5?Is Mexico for sale?I wish I had seen Lou Dobbs yesterday Lovie. There was a bill being proposed that would actually pay Mexico to keep them there. Yikes. I need to look into it further. Lorster, As far as turning a person away esp with TB, it's pretty clear he must be treated so as to not infect anyone else. There comes a point of no return for some of these hospitals such as the ones that closed due to Illegals over running them. Perhaps send the bill to the country of origin. Of course they would not pay since it makes sense for them not too. Now Buying Mexico, what a great idea.....(TIC ). I can only hope at some point the Government will uphold the sovernty of the USA and take it serious .................Isn't Mexico already a democratic nation??What would be wrong with sending Mexico the bill? I wonder if it has been tried.In that other article Suzanne posted it said the medical cost for illegal immigrants was /per household
a year, so perhaps that isn't where the entire healthcare budget is going as you like to imagine.
Gimpy-a-gogo2008-05-15 14:56:34Here's the link to that article:
http://www.healthbeatblog.org/2008/05/health-care-r-1.html [QUOTE=Lovie] Is Mexico for sale?[/QUOTE]
Iraq wasn't for sale either Lovie...but man did we pay a big price for that.....mess.Here is some more information that came out of that RAND study. The 11.00 a household is a bit scewed because of the ages that were surveyed. www.medicalnewstoday.com
For the study, researchers used data from a 2000 survey of 2,543 adults in 65 Los Angeles County neighborhoods. Children and seniors were excluded from the study. The survey asked participants about their use of hospitals and clinics over the past two years. Participants also were asked a number of questions about their legal status and whether they were authorized the stay in the U.S., as well as questions to determine the extent of a neighborhood's impact on people's lives. Researchers inflated the cost of services by 25% to account for incidental costs, according to study author and RAND economist Jim Smith. Researchers found that 22% of undocumented immigrants have health insurance, which covered about 2 million in costs in 2000. Immigrants paid 1 million of health care costs out-of-pocket. The study also found that undocumented immigrants tend to visit physicians less frequently than U.S. citizens because they are younger and because people with chronic health problems are less likely to cross the border, according to Smith. Researchers also found that 40% of male undocumented immigrants had never received a medical checkup and that 23% had never seen physicians, compared with 21% and 10% of male U.S. citizens, respectively. About 21% of undocumented female immigrants had never received a checkup, compared with 5% of female U.S. citizens, according to the study.
lorster2008-05-15 15:16:47
Copyright ArthritisInsight.com