Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Health & Wellness

McCain's Erratic Health Strategy: Now He's Slashing Medicare

By RJ Eskow, Huffington Post. Posted October 11, 2008.


When a candidate suddenly, almost whimsically changes the way he proposes to handle $1.3 trillion, it's time to get nervous.
Advertisement

Those of us who analyze health policy and trends for a living have struggled to follow John McCain's health plan through its many seemingly-improvised changes. First he was taxing health benefits through both payroll and income tax. Then he said he only intended to apply income tax, which meant that his plan would create even larger deficits. Now he says there won't be deficits, because he's going to make up the cost of those tax credits by slashing Medicare and Medicaid.

When a candidate suddenly, almost whimsically changes the way he proposes to handle $1.3 trillion -- which is the amount of money his plan puts in play over the next ten years -- it's time to get nervous.

We already knew the McCain plan was going to cost most Americans money (in at least three different ways.) Now we know it could jeopardize their medical care when they get older, too. The end result of this off-the-cuff planning could change the way Americans receive, or don't receive, medical care in this country.

Even though the Washington Post gave Joe Biden "two pinocchios" for his remarks about the McCain health plan, a careful reading of even their critique shows that Biden told the real story. Middle-class wage earners could save something in the first year, but that amount would dwindle over time and eventually become a deficit. And the number of uninsured would actually increase over the long term, according to unbiased studies.

McCain's campaign is now saying that he has given up on the idea of taxing payroll taxes for health benefits, or that it was never intended in the first place. Yet the distinction was not drawn for quite some time, making it appear like a relatively last-minute tweak. Some lobbying may have been involved, too, since this change also insures that corporations won't have to pay a portion of McCain's tax increases. (Companies have payroll tax obligations, too).

With this change, conservative estimates now place the initial number of people losing employer benefits at twenty million. These twenty million people will have $5,000 in credits to buy $12,000 worth of coverage. And that $12,000 figure could rise rapidly without the bulk-buying power and employee satisfaction concerns of employers. (Yes, they do have them.)

McCain is also proposing to dismantle a number of the state rules governing insurance. The way carriers set rates, their ability to deny care, and other practices might be stripped of current consumer protections in many parts of the country. That $12,000 figure could skyrocket as these rules are lifted and as more coverage is transferred to from group to individual policies. (Individual rates tend to be lower now because enrollees tend to be younger and healthier. That will change, perhaps drastically, as the rest of us move in and other factors take over.)

It's important that Americans understand the implications of these changes. We should continue to discuss the uninsured, but it's also important to consider the underinsured - which now includes most of us to some extent. Insurers are covering less and less of the cost of care for those of who have coverage. As a result, personal medical indebtedness is increasing, even as credit is getting harder and costlier to obtain.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: health, health care, medicare

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Tragedy Is
Posted by: Last Chance on Oct 11, 2008 12:46 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush & Company have successfully bankrupted the federal treasury, now in debt so far beyond any hope of repayment, all our social services may be cut or eliminated. That's the dilemma now facing Governor Schwartzenegger in California. Without Federal help the state cannot pay wages and salaries. But the Fed is operating with faux dollars that have no real existence. It's all debt. Bush and his rightwing Republicans did this deliberately because they have hated social service programs ever since Roosevelt established them the 1930s. But now the whole financial fabric of America and the world capitalist system is in crisis because big business Republicans forgot all their wealth comes from millions of people with money to spend, without which there is no market and no profits.

So, what can the people do to survive? Acquire parcels of land on which to grow their own food, so when the money is gone they won't starve. Then, connect with other such food-growing villages to help each other.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Squeeze a Doctor For Lunch
Posted by: edgar1 on Oct 11, 2008 1:45 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
why the left has a problem with cutting payments to doctors is beyond me. Especially specialists who use their stranglehold over items like MRIs to price fix. A limited number of specialists-high prices. Putting a few radiologists in jail, including those who are here thanks to discriminatory immigration laws that favor foreign medical students and doctors might broadent the perspective these money grubbing bloodsuckers have of their patients, including their least fortunate patients. There is a huge imbalance of physicians between affluent and poor areas. Medicare and medicaid payments for doctors in poor areas could be hiked; payments for Beverly Hills and Boca Raton could be cut.

What are the doctors going to do? Become social workers? Real estate agents? Science teachers in high schools?

The empathy by liberals for the wealth of doctors is most curious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pre-existing conditions?
Posted by: heid on Oct 13, 2008 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What about pre-existing conditions? This article misses the point that insurance companies can, and most assuredly do, cherry-pick who they're cover.

Any woman who's had a pap smear that wasn't perfect won't be taken on most plans. If she's ever been diagnosed as having fibrocystic breasts (something that up to one-third of women have) won't get on most plans.

Any history of cancer - or almost-cancer - and you can forget medical coverage. Tuberculosis? Forget it. Just developed a dangerous infection? Don't count on getting insurance until after you've survived it. Over age 50? Good luck; you're going to need it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is McCain's Insurance Coverage? What does he use?
Posted by: sallyride on Oct 13, 2008 3:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is McCain using his veterans' benefits for his healthcare, or the Senate's? Or, does he get to use both?

That man has never had to budget, much less work; after picked up his trophy wife, she supported him, too. He's lived off tax dollars all of his life -- who's he kidding being a "Conservative Candidate"? That one makes me furious.

People who get their educations on the tax payers, like at the military academies, then turn around an look down on "the commoners" should not be allowed to run for office.

We need to change the qualifications for Office under the Constitution--things change. No one should be qualified to run who has not worked some 40-hour/week job for 10 years. Then we know we at least have someone who knows a bit about life "down here".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re: Slashing Medicare
Posted by: frank69 on Oct 13, 2008 9:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure, McNutt doesn't have to use Medicare. Congress takes care of their own health care much better than the rest of us can. Fuck stupid McBushCain! Rather than slashing Medicare, he should slash his own throat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]