Monday, April 10, 2006

To Your Health

BOSTON Apr 4, 2006 (AP)— Lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a bill Tuesday that would make Massachusetts the first state to require that all its citizens have some form of health insurance.

The plan approved just 24 hours after the final details were released would use a combination of financial incentives and penalties to dramatically expand access to health care over the next three years and extend coverage to the state's estimated 500,000 uninsured.

If all goes as planned, poor people will be offered free or heavily subsidized coverage; those who can afford insurance but refuse to get it will face increasing tax penalties until they obtain coverage; and those already insured will see a modest drop in their premiums.

The measure does not call for new taxes but would require businesses that do not offer insurance to pay a $295 annual fee per employee.

More
I'm all for extending health care to people who don't have it. But forcing people to buy health insurance? Does that make any sense?

I don't like it. It's predicated on the assumption that if only those stupid lower-class people were forced to prioritize and spend money on things that matter instead of frittering away their extra $200 a week on cans of beans or country music CDs or whatever it is poor people buy.

The fact is, lower-income people don't buy health insurance because they like the thrill of living without a net or because they foolishly think they won't get sick. Rather, they simply can't afford rent, food, transportation, AND health care. Rather, the needs of shelter, food, and getting to work are far more pressing than the possibility of injury. This added to the fact that most of the cheaper health-coverage plans only provide for 'catastrophic' health problems while people who work in manual or service jobs are more susceptible to chronic condictions which require constant treatments which add up; pill-by-pill costing $20 a day instead of a one-time $10,000 operation. Not to mention the fact that some of those most in need of free health care don't even have to money to get to the hospital or doctor's office in the first place.

Temporary half-measures are appealing, but ultimately they just confuse the hell out of people.

1 comment:

troutsky said...

As a comprehensive solution it falls short but not as short as doing nothing. You first state the measure provides for free or heavily subsidized insurance for poor people but then say they must pay? Is it the income scale you disagree with?