Big Winners in California's New Health Care Plan: Study Says Households and Small Businesses
By Michael Monasky | June 1, 2017 | A study by a distinguished group of university economists, released yesterday at a Capitol ...
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2017/06/big-winners-in-californias-new-health.html
By Michael Monasky | June 1, 2017 |
A study by
a distinguished group of university economists, released yesterday at a Capitol
press conference, contradicted recent claims by the California State Department
of Finance that unfunded health care costs would be greater than the entire
state budget, or at least overwhelm it.
The State Senate Appropriations
Committee analysis for SB 562, The Healthy California Act, declared the bill
would cost $400 billion annually. With between $300 billion to $350 billion
currently available expenditures, finance staff noted a shortfall of $50
billion to $100 billion.
There were no firm details in the state's financial
analysis supporting these claims. California Nurses Association policy
consultant Michael Lighty chimed in saying “The Senate Appropriations analysis was
wrong.”
Enter
Robert Pollin, director of the Political Economy Research Institute, and a
professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. During a
State Capitol news conference, Pollin introduced a study, Economic Analysis
of the Healthy California Single-Payer Health Care Proposal (SB 562),
co-authored with three colleagues and focused upon four components of the bill - cost estimates of the current system at full coverage; cost savings upon
implementation of the bill; financing the bill; and impacts upon individual
households and various business types.
Pollin said
that nearly $370 billion is already being spent on health care in California.
Of 33.5 million Californians with health insurance, 12 million are
under-insured; 2.7 million are without any health insurance at all. His
research group calculated that a 15-percent increase in payments were needed to repair
system problems for the under-insured; and a 50-percent increase was needed to cover
those without health care. Collectively, under the current health insurance
scheme, costs would increase about 10%, from $370 to about $400 billion.
Additionally, Pollin
noted that savings came from structural changes and applied efficiencies.
Structural savings came from decreased administrative costs, and as much as 30-percent decrease in drug costs, according to the Veterans Administration and the
Canadian national system. Further savings came from applying MediCare fee
structures for providers. Such structural changes total 13-percent in savings.
Inefficiencies
in the current system constitute the second area of savings. The report lists
unnecessary services, fraud, inefficient deliveries of health care services,
and missed prevention opportunities. Pollin said that he assumed a five-percent savings
in this area, a conservative figure gleaned from a 2010 Institute Of Medicine
report that set those savings at 19-percent. When asked if universal access to health
care drives up utilization of services, he said that the report considers a five-percent increase in provision of services. He said that the report “does not adjust
downward for acuity of care” as for fewer emergency room visits and fewer
unnecessary hospital days for neglected medical conditions.
Between the
savings changes in structure and efficiencies (about 18-percent), less the increased
costs of universal coverage and expansion (almost 10-percent), the new health bill
should reduce costs by about 9-10%, from $370 to $330 billion. Pollin said that
public funds constitute 70-percent of
California's health care expenses, or about $225 billion per year.
Therefore, an additional $105 billion is needed. To meet this need, he proposed
two taxes: one on gross business receipts (which will raise about $93 billion),
and a sales tax (which will raise about $13 billion), both at 2.3-percent.
Pollin
pointed out two charts at the news conference - households and businesses. He
said that the bill is a “windfall for middle income families” who will see
about a net nine-percent lower health care costs, noting that “wealthy households will
pay more” (about one to two-percent) as they “now get a net subsidy” (about one-percent) from health
care expense tax credits. Pollin declared that “small businesses won't have to
pay anything” below an exemption level of $2 million gross receipts. Health
care expenditures will fall for those small businesses which cover their own
employees. Poor, MediCal-eligible households will receive a two-percent tax credit.
Pollin stated “this measure is good for businesses...and good for households.”
When asked
about the study's methodology, Pollin said that it was “simple arithmetic,”
the results of which “should be
reproducible.” He said that the report has “no econometrics yet for spillover
effects” of the data.
In response to a question about how dental and mental
health costs were included, Pollin said that the study group used “MediCare fee
structures” which are 22% below private insurance but 15% above MedicAid
(MediCal) reimbursement rates. “Dental costs should go down,” he said.
Pollin
responded to a question about the Kaiser model of care. He said “Kaiser
operates at a relatively high rate of efficiency” and that “integrated
care...yields efficiencies.” But, Pollin warned, The Healthy California Act
“does not adopt the Kaiser model.” Kaiser Health Foundation, which sells its
health insurance, opposes the bill.
Nurses'
union leader Rose Anne Demoro said that “unnecessary human suffering has
propelled this organization” to propose this bill. She said “the national
narrative is so horrible...the Affordable Care Act is unaffordable.”
Senator
Ricardo Lara, who authored the bill, said it's important that Pollin is
“friends with the governor.” He said it's time to eliminate the “network of
limits” that is the current health care system. Lara said he is pushing this
bill to “combat what is happening in DC.”
Yesterday the
Sacramento Bee highlighted the taxes proposed by the bill with the saturnine
headline, Higher taxes on cars and dining to pay for California health care?
Nurses have a proposal. The Bee's editorial board recently criticized the
bill under the headline, Universal health care for California? In
Fantasyland, maybe.
Health care foundations have active media companies,
including Kaiser Health News, which was absent and made no mention of the study
on its media page today. The California Health Care Foundation granted $110,000
to Capital Public Radio in 2014 to fund a health care reporter in Sacramento.
There was no mention by the station of the study or press conference.
Post a Comment