Latest News 
Lose your job, lose your health insurance.
That’s a scary thought at a time when so many jobs are disappearing. There’s supposed to be a solution – COBRA, a 1985 federal law that lets workers continue their employer-provided coverage for up to 18 months after ending employment.
COBRA, however, turns out not to be a answer for most people who become unemployed. As pointed out in a new report by the advocacy group Families USA, the national average for unemployment income is $1,278. The national average COBRA premium is $1,069 a month.
That’s 84 percent of the unemployment check, and would leave just over $200 a month for food, housing and other family needs. Yet food and housing typically cost $1,200 for a family of four, according to the report.
Not surprisingly, the result is that only 18 to 26 percent of those eligible for COBRA coverage actually sign up, the report said. (For an individual, the coverage is still expensive – $388 a month on average – but not quite as out-of-reach on a $1,278 unemployment check as for a family.)
According to Families USA, each one percentage point rise in unemployment increases the number of uninsured by 1.1 percent. In December alone, the unemployment rate went from 6.8 percent to 6.2 percent – a loss of 524,000 jobs, the Department of Labor reported.
The newly unemployed are generally not eligible for Medicaid programs which cover the low income, Families USA said. And COBRA isn’t available for people whose employers go out of business
– 01/16/09
The insurance industry will end years of under-reimbursing patients for care received, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said in announcing an agreement with insurance giant UnitedHealth Group.
UnitedHealth and other insurers have been basing payments for out-of-network care on a supposedly independent database of typical charges maintained by a company called Ingenix. But, it turns out, Ingenix is owned by UnitedHealth, the country’s largest health insurer. And Ingenix was generating numbers that caused patients to be under-reimbursed by their insurance company, generally by 10 to 28 percent, Cuomo said in a statement.
“For the past ten years, American patients have suffered from unfair reimbursements for critical medical services due to a conflict-ridden system that has been owned, operated, and manipulated by the health insurance industry,” Cuomo charged.
In its agreement with Cuomo, UnitedHealth agreed to pay $50 million to finance an independent non-profit to track typical charges by doctors and hospitals. When the non-profit is up and running, Ingenix will shut down its databases.
UnitedHealth and other insurers typically pay a set percentage – say, 70 or 80 percent – of the cost of out-of-network care. But they don’t base the percentage on what the doctor actually bills, but on “usual and customary” charges for that service.
According to Cuomo, Ingenix “intentionally skewed ‘usual and customary’ rates downward through faulty data collection, pool pooling procedures, and the lack of audits. That means many consumers were forced to pay more than they should have.”
It’s a reminder why one of CWA’s principles for health reform is a strong government role in making sure that insurance companies treat consumers fairly.
Another example came recently in California, where government regulators forced Blue Shield to reinstate coverage for nearly 700 people whose policies were cancelled when they got sick, the Los Angeles Times reported. Regulatory action and lawsuits charge that insurers have illegally cancelled policies for thousands of sick people in California.
– 01/15/09
It’s not just unions who see the need to fix the health care system.
Employers need to take an active role in health reform – including pushing for policies to cover the uninsured – James Dimon, CEO of the giant banking firm J.P. Morgan Chase, told a conference in San Francisco this week, according to reports in the Wall Street Journal health blog and on CNNmoney from Dow Jones Newswires .
“Corporations cannot walk away from this problem,” Dimon told a health conference sponsored by his bank’s investment banking unit.
“You could argue that it’s unethical” that so many Americans are uninsured, he said. “At a minimum it’s not humane.” He told the conference, “I think we need to ensure that the entire population – every American – is covered.”
Citing statistics showing the U.S. spends much more than any other country for health care, but doesn’t get better results, Dimon said there is a strong economic case for changing the health system.
CWA believes that employers need to be part of the solution. We’ve joined with our employers AT&T, Qwest and Embarq in a coalition to promote solutions called Better Health Care Together.
– 01/14/09
Tom Daschle, Barack Obama's choice to lead health reform,told a Senate hearing recently the administration would move in an “aggressive”way to reform health care.Responsewas positive. "Members of bothparties offered a friendly welcome to Mr. Daschle," the New York Times reported.
Testifying in a confirmation hearing at the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, Daschle spoke of "undertaking health reform in a way that is aggressive, open and responsive to Americans' concerns." Needed reforms, he said, include "ensuring all Americans have health care." Beyond the problem of the uninsured, "Even Americans who do have health insurance don't always get the care they need." And, he added, "It needs to be high-quality care."
The tone of the hearing shows that both parties are interested in health reform. That doesn't mean, of course, that there won't be differences on particulars. For example, Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, a leading Republican voice on health issues, issued a statement arguing that expansion of coverage needs to be done through private insurance companies, not through a government-run program. Daschle and Obama have supported the idea of a public program, similar to Medicare, which could serve as an alternative to private insurers for individuals or employers who want such a choice.
At the hearing, however, Enzi spoke not of disagreement over mechanisms but common goals. "I know that we have a shared commitment to reducing the number of uninsured Americans, containing costs, improving quality and making health care more accessible to everyone," Enzi said, according to The Washington Post.
Daschle, too, promised "close collaboration with Congress." He also said Obama "realizes that change cannot be dictated form the While House and Washington out - but must come from the grassroots fo this country and involve as many Americans as possible in the process of reform."
– 01/13/09
At this point, it isn't news. But it is a reminder of why we need health reform, so here goes: Health costs are up again.
The increase is a little slower than the year before, but still well ahead of the rate of inflation or economic growth, meaning that health is eating up an increasing share of personal and national income.
Altogether, health spending represented 16.3 percent of GDP in 2007, up from 16.0 the year before, according to another new report, this one a study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in the January-February issue of the policy journal Health Affairs.
Spending was up 6.1 percent, according to CMS, in what is considered the most comprehensive report on health costs each year. Although CMS administers Medicare and Medicaid, the report covers all medical spending, including private insurance and out-of-pocket spending by patients. The growth was a little slower than the 6.7 percent rate the year before. But your pay didn’t go up 6.1 percent, did it?
The slight slowing was caused entirely by a decline in prescription spending driven by the shift to more generic medications. Hospitals, doctors, nursing homes and other major health spending categories continue to go up as fast as ever.
"Health care costs in 2007 may have increased less than in previous years, but they have still increased at a rate far greater than the general rate of inflation," Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and author of a new health reform plan, wrote for the health care blog of National Journal. "And for millions of families and small businesses, affordable health insurance is still growing far out of their reach."
The increase pinches not just families and businesses, but government spending. "The rate of growth of spending on health care is the single greatest threat to budget balance over the long run," the Congressional Budget Office warned in testimony to Congress this month. (And a thanks to health economist Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, at her blog, Health Populi, for spotting that warning on page 31 of a dense report.)
– 01/12/09
Recently, the Obama health team sought public comments and suggestions on health reform, and CWA members responded.
Now, we’re posting the full text of some of those comments, and excerpts from many others. Check them out.
It’s not too late to add your voice.
– 01/09/09
Major reform of the health system is a top priority for the general public as well as for members of the progressive group MoveOn.
In a Washington Post-ABC News Poll, more than three quarters of Americans said they wanted to see “major changes” in the health system. And of those, about two thirds wanted the President-elect Barack Obama to move immediately, rather than waiting until later in the presidential term.
Also, about two-thirds said they were optimistic that the Obama administration would achieve “significant improvements” in the health system.
Health reform was also named as the top priority by members of MoveOn. In online voting, 65% of MoveOn members listed universal health care as one of their top three goals for 2009 – edging out even economic recovery and job creation, which finished second with 62%.
Health care industry executives and policy scholars seem ready for major changes, too. In a poll of “opinion leaders” by the Commonwealth Fund and the trade publication Modern Healthcare, 85 percent called for changing the way doctors and hospitals are paid, to create incentives for quality rather than just for volume of service. Such payment reform is likely to be a key element of any health reform proposal from the Obama administration and Congress.
– 01/02/09
A number of CWA members have accepted the invitation of the Obama health team to express their ideas and concerns about health reform. We urge you to keep speaking up, either sending a message using our form or signing up for a houseparty.
And let us know when you respond. We'll be printing some of the responses here.
This is the first, a letter to the Obama team from Mark Gruenberg, a member of the executive council of Local 32035, the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild in Washington, D.C. Mark is also a small employer, running a union news service.
I am very encouraged by your receptiveness to the opinions of citizens on the issue of reforming health care.
The Newspaper Guild/CWA, my union, has asked us to remind you that while you consider heath care reform options, please keep two concerns in mind:
(1) No employer should be able to free load off the rest of us, even if another company covers one of their workers through a spouse or a partner. The law must force EACH employer to provide insurance for their employees or pay into a public plan for un- and under-insured Americans. If any employee is covered by another person's plan, the firm has to pay into the public fund anyway. It is time to end Wal-Mart's freeloading off the public trough -- and they're only the worst of many bad apples.
(2) Pay special attention to people between the ages of 55 and 64 (I'm 55). We're too young for Medicare. Many of my colleagues cannot afford health insurance plans because of their age and health status.
Employers with older workforces and employers who offer retiree health insurance tend to have much higher health costs than employers with younger workers or don't offer health coverage to retirees. Please make sure these people are not left out in the cold and the employers who shoulder the cost burden are offered relief.
I have some experience with this, which I will detail below.
But those moves are what I call tinkering with the broken health care system. Here's what I really want, and -- according to non-skewed opinion polls -- so does most of the country: BLOW IT UP.
Health care takes one-sixth of our GDP, a proportion scheduled to rise to a quarter of it within 10 years unless something drastic is done to control costs.
And what are the cost drivers that make health care unaffordable? Insurance company overhead (30% of total costs) and expensive, often unnecessary treatments pushed by the pharmaceutical manufacturers and the medical equipment makers.
Big Pharma is the most-profitable industry in the U.S., and the insurers are close behind. Guess why.
It doesn't help that all this spending does not produce excellent outcomes. We are middle of the pack among developed nations in a whole host of measures of health care quality, except in cost. There, we're first, double the next most-expensive.
The solution is to junk the present system. Pollster Celinda Lake will tell you citizens don't want that, but her polls are skewed. A huge majority prefers a single-payer GOVERNMENT-RUN system, like Medicare, but covering everyone. And Medicare, for all its faults, has only 3% overhead.
Finally, my experience: I run a small news service for union media. We have two workers. We also have health insurance. Because of our size, there IS NO COMPETITION FOR OUR BUSINESS, despite what your plan envisions (much less the opposition's "you're on your own" schemes). It's either Blue Cross or individual coverage.
Five years ago, for three straight years, BCBS hit us with -- I am not kidding -- 30% annual rate hikes.
We had to cut literally just about everything else to pay for them: Rent, business-related insurance, outside expenses, you name it. The only thing not cut was my co-worker's pay....so I had to cut mine, by two-thirds. Thanks to BCBS, I qualified for EITC. Two years ago our local government (DC) cracked down on such exploitation: Rates were frozen for one year and rose 8% last year.
I do not want to be at the mercy of that monster again. The way to end it is to abolish private insurance, throw all its execs onto the jobless line (along with its bean-counters) and enact single-payer Medicare for all.
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns.
Sincerely,
Mark Gruenberg
Press Associates Union News Service
– 12/26/08
Tom Daschle, named last week by President-elect Barack Obama as chief of the new White House Office of Health Reform, published a book on health reform last year.
The book, called Critical: What we Can Do about the Healthcare Crisis, may offer some clues about the shape of an Obama reform plan. And it may give even greater insight into a potential strategy to get reform passed, according to a report this week in the Los Angeles Times and an analysis from the blog of the policy journal Health Affairs.
Daschle believes reform should "put a premium on cooperation between the White House, Congress and major healthcare interest groups," the Times said. In the book, Daschle wrote that the Clinton health reform effort, crafted by a secretive task force of experts without consulting the industry or Congress "only bred resentment among the people who weren’t invited to participate." wrote. The eventual Clinton plan faced hostility from key stakeholders and had no buy-in from Congress - a combination which doomed it to defeat.
Already, Daschle and the Obama team are showing an open process by inviting anyone interested to submit comments or attend a houseparty discussion - and we urge CWA members to make their feelings known.
Also, the reports on the Daschle book suggest, the reform effort is likely to emphasize "speed" - Clinton lost momentum by waiting a year before coming up with a bill – and “simplicity.” As Jeff Goldsmith wrote on the Health Affairs blog, "Daschle will certainly not voluntarily produce anything remotely resembling the 1,346-page [Clinton bill] so many of us used as a doorstop."
In his book, Daschle suggests leaving many of the details of health reform – such as what benefits need to be included in coverage and what level of premium is affordable – to a board, relatively insulated from politics, which he compares to the Federal Reserve. That will allow a bill to go through Congress that sets broad principles, but doesn’t include specific details and cost projections that could bog down debate and serve as targets for opponents.
While the board gets set up, Goldsmith wrote, "This would conveniently buy Obama time for the economy to recover, time to find funding for needed federal subsidies to small businesses and the unemployed uninsured, as well as time for business to strengthen enough to afford an employer mandate."
– 12/23/08
The decline in the economy is increasing the stress on the health system – people need more treatment, but are less able to pay for it. And the stress on the health system is accelerating the decline of the economy - medical debt is a factor in about half of bankruptcies and foreclosures.
That's why President-elect Barack Obama has recognized that health reform is part of fixing the economy. In announcing his health reform team, Obama said, "It’s not something we can put off because we’re in an emergency. This is part of the emergency."
There’s plenty of fresh evidence that he’s right.
- In a recent survey for AARP of people over age 45, 22 percent said they have delayed seeing a doctor, 16 percent said they have cut back on preventive care, and 16 percent said they are not very confident or not at all confident they will be able to afford the care they need.
- As people are skipping care, hospitals are faced with empty beds. The American Hospital Association reported that 38 percent of hospitals are seeing significantly fewer admissions. With investment income also declining, hospitals on average operated at a 1.6 percent loss in the third quarter of 2008, compared with a 6.1 percent positive margin in the same period in 2007. The association warned that “hospitals, which employ 5 million people nationwide, could be facing uncertain times as their financial health falters.”
- Twice as many workers as last year (38 percent vs. 19 percent) are selecting health plans with lower premiums – leaving them exposed to higher deductibles and co-payments if they do need treatment, according to Watson Wyatt, a benefits consulting firm. So although there are short-term savings, more people could be skipping care or facing medical debt in the future.
All of which helps build the case for serious reform.
As the New York Times reported, "With health insurance premiums rising this decade at four times the rate of inflation, and draining a growing share of personal income, middle-class support for an overhaul would seem to be reaching critical mass. If a broad swath of Americans feel destabilized enough by health costs, their demands for relief could help marginalize the kind of opposition from entrenched interests that has killed previous efforts."
– 12/23/08
Page 20 of 32 pages « First < 18 19 20 21 22 > Last »
