Get out your designer Gucci hospital gowns and your diamond-studded radiation safety goggles: The red carpet's coming to the Capitol. "Sicko," Michael Moore's latest Mooramentry about America's health-care system, is debuting in Sacramento (as well as lesser metropoli: New York City, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.) on June 12. The big man will be here--and just in time for the state budget conference committee to be finishing up. It'll be just like Cannes!
Moore's choice of venue isn't hard to grasp, as the Capitol here and in D.C. are enmeshed in debate about cost and availability of health care. (NYC and L.A. share a slightly different political focus, on universal access to rhytidectomies). Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez is hosting the premiere and will meet with Moore in the Capitol as well. (Note to Michael Moore: possible next project: "McClintock and Me".)
Don't bet that Moore will have too much enthusiam for Nunez's reform plan--or those of anyone in Sacramento except for single-payer icon Sen. Sheila Kuehl--because Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Democratic leaders have already agreed to build on the existing system of private insurers, which Moore's movie blames for much of American's health-care ills.
Tickets to the premiere of "Sicko" will be $150,000 each, with Insurance covering $8.75 and a co-pay of $149,991.25.
-- Jordan Rau
Update: During his visit on June 12, Moore will testify at a legislative briefing put on by Kuehl. He'll also participate in -- prepare for a big surprise -- a rally put on by the California Nurses Assn., which supports single-payer, and Physicians for a National Health Program, which, well, take a giant crazy guess about its ideological orientation. Then there's the actual screening; no word yet of an afterparty. The movie opens June 29.
Chris Reed at "America's Finest Blog" has been digging into Gov. Schwarzenegger's health care proposal and finds an insurmountable wall that can't be torn down without Congress and the president, or the federal courts.
The elephant in the punchbowl is called ERISA, a federal law that prohibits states from dictating health-plan coverage - to avoid a hodgepodge of laws in all 50 states. Reed writes: "Last week, (former) state Attorney
General Bill Lockyer told me that in Sacramento, there was an awareness
that the governor's health initiative might not survive the ERISA
challenge, but that 'some are of the view that Congress would change
the law' if California actually did pass something grand and ambitious.
Wow - realism about how Arnold's initiative might be made lawful
instead of boundless, groundless optimism."
Reed's analysis is here. It's long, and he takes a meandering tour through Central Europe at one point, but it's worth a look. In any event, whatever Schwarzenegger and the Legislature produce on health care reform, it's likely to be challenged with a referendum like in 2004 with Proposition 72, which overturned a pay-or-play system of health coverage for employers. After that, we can talk about the federal courts.
Today, Schwarzenegger heads to Eureka for a demonstration of telemedicine - linking a 6-year-old patient, her mother, a pediatrician in Eureka and neurologists in Phoenix.
On Tuesday, Dr. Schwarzenegger spoke with patient
Ivy Harris of San Diego during a tour of the emergency
room at Scripps Mercy Hospital (pictured.) According to a pool report of the visit, Harris has been in the hospital since Friday due to complications from a March 20 surgery to remove intestinal blockage.
"The hospital is taking good care of me," Harris told the governor. She questioned Schwarzenegger about how his health care insurance reform plan might affect unmarried women such as herself, and she noted that her out-of-pocket costs for health care have increased substantially in recent years. "We should have free health insurance," she said.
"Someone always has to pay for it," the governor replied. "What we want to do is make sure that health insurance covers everyone."
(Photos: Laura Embry/San Diego Union-Tribune, via AP; Duncan McIntosh/Office of Gov. Schwarzenegger.)
State Sen. Sheila Kuehl, the former child actress and Harvard grad, is listed as the 20th most powerful gay person in the U.S., behind David Geffen and Ellen DeGeneres but ahead of Annie Leibovitz, Jodie Foster and 28 others on the top-50 roster.
Kuehl, who represents the wealthy 23rd senate district in L.A., is once again carrying universal health care legislation. In the Sacramento News and Review this week, she compares the state's medical system to a bad relationship that needs to end. "California, it's time to move on with our lives. It's time we ask for
what we really want and what we deserve: affordable, high-quality
health care for all."
In a speech to journalists in Universal City yesterday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger once again called for post-partisan cooperation on overhauling California's out-of-whack health care system. Schwarzenegger, channeling his wife, Maria Shriver, even quoted former Kennedy advisor Ted Sorensen:
"There are problems more important than party labels. Problems require
practical solutions, not dependent upon ideology, personality, or
political history."
The post-partisan governor then proceeded to reject two health-care ideas floating around the Capitol: "Some say it should
be market-driven. Others say that government should run the system. The
system we have now is market-driven, but it does not work. We have also
seen state-run health care in the prisons, and that hasn't worked."
Finally, the governor concludes in prepared remarks: "But if you take our proposal as a
whole, I think you will agree it is the best reform plan anyone has
come up with." [Emphasis added.]
Schwarzenegger is doing what he's supposed to do - sell his own legislative plan to the public. At the same time, he's telling the ideological "extremes" on both ends that their ideas are meaningless and they better "jump on board the progress train." Sounds like ordinary politics.
(Photo: Max Whittaker / Reuters)
 Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who turns 60 in July, graces the cover of the AARP Bulletin in a doctor's smock this month illustrating an article about overhauling health insurance in several states. He's on the cover of Outside magazine as well. (See post below about skepticism over his "carbon offset" plan.)
The AARP piece generally focuses on people 50 to 64, who are not yet eligible for Medicare, and notes: "The California plan, like that of Massachusetts, would prohibit the denial of coverage based on age or health status. Such a ban could especially help boomers who are of an age when health problems tend to increase."
The bulletin also has an interesting poll about people's views on the uninsured. For the most part, the public appears fairly well informed about who is insured and why.
A Political Muscle reader writes in about the AARP cover: "The body-hugging jacket makes him look more like a butcher than I guess the doctor look he's going for. One person told me that he looks more like 'Sweeney Todd, the Demon Butcher of Fleet Street.' "
"I want to spend very little time on that because it doesn't move us forward. What moves us forward is to solve the problem." --Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger interview about his health-care plan.
One more and we've got a trend! This morning, Schwarzenegger essentially repeated the above statement during an online chat with business executives in San Diego. The governor wants people to stop obsessing over whether his proposed health-care plan includes a "tax" or a "fee." (He would charge doctors, businesses and hospitals to boost insurance coverage in California.)
Click here to view online chat.
 The governor said today: "I am concentrating on getting health-care reform and insuring everyone in California rather than worrying about what is the definition of something." [Emphasis added.]
This is what's called a talking point.
But few things are more important, in fact, than whether Schwarzenegger's plan includes a tax or a fee. Schwarzenegger wants to define the surcharge as a "fee" because it allows the Legislature to approve the plan with a majority vote--bypassing Republicans.
But by doing that, Schwarzenegger risks running into the 1974 Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Only the federal government can mandate health-care benefits, to avoid conflicting laws state-by-state. Attorney Mark Johnson, a national expert on ERISA, told The Times that Schwarzenegger's plan--if it is challenged in court--would violate ERISA. Johnson said, "This would be a direct attempt to manage a plan. I don't think it would pass muster."
Lawyers all over California are examining a federal court decision out of Maryland over its pay-or-play system. Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger's people say his plan does not single out individual health plans and does not mandate specific benefits, so it would not violate ERISA. The governor's online chat was organized to "address the estimated $14.65 billion in hidden taxes that business currently pay due to the broken health-care system."
Now, that's a tax we can talk about.
"As for dealing with the uninsured - 6.5 million in California, 47 million and growing across the U.S. - I'd argue that coverage should be a basic right and would endorse a national single-payer system. But clearly, that isn't going to happen anytime soon. Politically, it's a nonstarter. Yet so is the governor's plan. The reason is simple: Businesses big and small will knife it, just as they did in D.C."
- The L.A. Times' Rick Wartzman launches a new column in the business section feeling pessimistic about Schwarzenegger's chances.
Californians overwhelming dislike President George W. Bush and think going to war with Iraq was not worth it, a new Public Policy Institute of California poll shows. But voters think Gov. Arnold "Post-Partisan" Schwarzenegger is doing a good job - 58% approval rating, compared to only 29% for the president. The California Legislature is bouncing back too. Hate has turned to mild engagement.
 Think Californians don't like taxes? Sort of. Sixty-one percent said they would prefer a "universal health care system" where everyone is covered by a government program and "financed by taxpayers," over the current system. Of course, this is a two-option choice. But 63% supported raising taxes to "guarantee health insurance for all citizens." And 54% said they would generally favor higher taxes for more services. This is good news for lawmakers such as state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, who is attempting to do just that, but also gives a little breathing room for Schwarzenegger as he attempts to surcharge doctors, hospitals and employers for his universal plan. And even larger number, 71%, said they favored Schwarzenegger's plan for shared responsibility.
Schwarzenegger gets mixed reviews on education and health care in the survey. Voters were almost evenly divided on whether he was doing a good job on those subjects. But they generally liked how he was doing on transportation and the environment. And here is an interesting tidbit that Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate leader Don Perata might use: "When it comes to the tough choices involved in the state budget, both in deciding how much Californians should pay in taxes and how to fund state programs, whose approach do you most prefer — Governor Schwarzenegger's, the Democrats' in the legislature, or Republicans' in the legislature?"
- 38% - Democrats'
- 22% - Schwarzenegger's
- 21% - Republicans'
Of course, Schwarzenegger is a Republican, so you could say that 43% prefer the GOP when it comes to the budget and taxes. But then you have to subtract maybe 32% from the 43%, because Schwarzenegger is sort of 32% Democrat. Oh, never mind. Read the full report here. Full text of PPIC's release after the jump below. (Photo: Tim Sloan / AFP-Getty Images)
Read on »
 "We'll learn a lot about what works and doesn't work. We're certainly going to see the political hurdles ... There isn't anybody in the country who knows more than I do how difficult this is." - U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, commiserating about Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's California health care plan, in Time.
The magazine notes "striking" similarities between Schwarzenegger's 2007 plan and Clinton's failed federal effort more than a dozen years ago - an effort that "almost took her husband's presidency with it."
(Photo: Mark Wilson / Getty Images)
State Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), whose universal health care plan Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed last year, weighs in again on the governor's new ideas. This time, Kuehl doesn't believe people should be calling Schwarzenegger's plan "universal" health care just because he requires everyone in the state to purchase insurance. Her point:  "Would you call it Universal Auto Insurance? 25% of Californians don’t comply - so many that we all have to carry Uninsured Motorist Insurance, in effect paying more for those who are uninsured, just as the Governor has suddenly discovered we do in the area of healthcare.
"His proposal would simply continue this problem in the much more complicated and important area of health insurance, with no controls on raises in premiums and no requirement for comprehensive or even adequate coverage, so every Californian could be required to pay high premiums, high deductibles, high co-pays and high out of pocket expenses, for very little coverage."
Then Kuehl (in photo as Zelda Gilroy from "The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis") goes through the governor's plan line by line, and rips it apart: no minimum guarantee of coverage, no cost containment, unequal burden on the poor, possible premium increases, and so on, the senator says. This essay gives a pretty good idea of where liberal Democrats stand on the governor's plan - votes he needs.
The Schwarzenegger administration has been working diligently to sabotage the notion that its health care plan contains a tax. The problem is more tactical than philosophical: A tax means you have to work with Republicans in the Legislature for the necessary 2/3 vote to get it passed.
 To avoid that icky prospect, the administration contends that the $4.5 billion a year raised from hospitals, doctors and businesses stays within the system and is leveraged with federal money that all gets washed back for the benefit of the health care collective. In an essay outlining the plan, finance director Mike Genest says hospitals and doctors would receive a few million new paying customers, bringing in billions of dollars. And, he says, Californians could see taxes reduced by $8.4 billion because Schwarzenegger would allow employees to save pre-tax money for health care.
Nice argument, but that's not exactly what Schwarzenegger & Co. said only a few months ago about Phil Angelides' health care mandate, according to the San Jose Mercury News. "Angelides and others complained that the mandate wasn't a tax; the governor's aides insisted it was. 'If you ask any business owner if employer-mandated health care is a tax, I would argue that they would say yes,' Schwarzenegger's campaign spokesman, Matt David, said in August." More:  "When Angelides was asked in a recent interview about Schwarzenegger's health care proposal, he chuckled. 'The governor ended up dreaming up more taxes than ever popped in my head,' Angelides said. 'It's unfortunate the governor used that in campaign season to attack me on what he has now admitted is a good idea.' "
Times' columnist George Skelton found another: "... a 2004 Schwarzenegger 'voter guide' mailed to households by the Republican Party. On that November's ballot was a measure, Proposition 72, to repeal a health care act sponsored by state Senate leader John Burton (D-San Francisco). He wanted to require employers with at least 50 workers to provide health insurance or pay a fee to the state. 'Play or pay.' In the GOP mailer, Schwarzenegger called that employer fee a 'job killing health care tax.' "
Of course, those were campaigns. So we would have been fools to believe what Schwarzenegger and his aides said then, right?
(Photos: Paul Sakuma / AP; Rich Pedroncelli / AP)
A new poll released today by the Survey & Policy Research Institute at San Jose State University shows the majority of Californians "firmly" believe the state should guarantee health insurance. But including illegal immigrants is a "nonstarter," as they say.
Read about the poll here. (PDF)
"People may be persuaded by the argument that providing insurance for illegal immigrants is less expensive and more efficient than treating them in hospital emergency rooms, as required by law," said Phil Trounstine with the institute. "But the majority will have to be won over. In the absence of other reasoning, Californians oppose the idea of guaranteeing health insurance to those who are here illegally."
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's health care plan looks a lot like Massachusetts, a Massachusetts newspaper reports. An expert at MIT who, the paper reports, "created a theoretical model of the Massachusetts health care market," embeds at Schwarzenegger's office. "Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology," the paper explains, "worked from Thanksgiving through the announcement on Monday." Gruber said he was "crunching all the numbers so it would all come together," and the paper said that, "He will continue to provide Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature with data and projections."
The Consumer Alliance for a Strong Economy, the front group running TV ads in the Sacramento market lambasting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's new health care plan, won't reveal its donors except to say "they are all small." The group has been fighting to keep its financial supporters secret for years, despite efforts by lawmakers and campaign finance reformers to out them.
 The Capitol has some anxiety over the ads, which ran in prominent spots on the three major networks immediately after Schwarzenegger's State of the State speech (and continue to run on cable). The governor's office, health care advocates and others don't want a repeat of the PR barrage that killed HillaryCare, even though the CASE campaign seems relatively harmless at this point.
The group is run out of the Republican PR firm, Gilliard Blanning Wysocki and Assoc., and has used small TV ad buys to oppose mandatory health insurance under Proposition 72, the November 2004 referendum, and sabotage Democratic efforts to raise the minimum wage. They also wrote letters to lawmakers supporting Schwarzenegger's workers' compensation reform package.
"Our position is we'll applaud the governor when he does well, and urge him to do well when he does not," said Chris Wysocki with the firm.
The group, which claims to have about 10,000 small business owners and others on its mailing list, has dogged state Sen. Dean Florez, the Fresno area Democrat who Wysocki said has been very "anti-business" despite his moderate district and campaign promises. The Florez TV ads, which aired when the senator was not on the ballot, told viewers: "Dean Florez talks like a moderate. But his voting record in Sacramento tells a different story. Florez says he supports business, but he's voted against business 89 percent of the time. Florez says he supports agriculture, but he's voted against farmers 90 percent of the time. According to the Chamber of Commerce, the bills Florez voted for will drive thousands of jobs out of California. You decide. Is Dean Florez really a moderate?"
Florez was so upset about the CASE ads that he wrote legislation in 2005 to force the group and others to reveal their donors. The legislation died before it landed on Schwarzenegger's desk and hasn't been revived. According to the Fresno Bee, Florez calculated that CASE spent more than $300,000 on the ads, but Wysocki said the buy was about $35,000 on stations in his district.
Started in 2002, CASE was organized as a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) nonprofit that is not required to disclose who sends it money. Wysocki said the donors "have a right to privacy. People who want to criticize government often are afraid of what government officials will do, which is why anonymous speech is so important." Wysocki said all of the donors are small and no single major corporation or organization is behind the group.
Nonprofits frequently purchase tiny amounts of airtime for controversial TV ads, then use any collateral media attention to raise more money for their organizations. "The key thing is there are some folks who see health care reform as an opportunity to fund raise from likely opponents in the business community, rather than a serious effort to fix some serious problems. This is an example of it," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access, which supported the Proposition 72 efforts.
Wysocki denied this was the motive behind the small, well-timed placement of the anti-Schwarzenegger ads running only in Sacramento. "It's not a fundraising tool," Wysocki said. "This is why we were created, which is to raise public awareness about these issues."
 Inevitably, a conservative small business group is launching a TV ad to oppose Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's "$1 billion tax increase" to pay for a new California health care system.
View the ad here.
The 30-second ad comes one day after Schwarzenegger announced the plan, widely panned by conservatives but treated with optimism by Democrats, some big businesses, health care advocates and even HMOs. The ad was produced by the political PR firm of Gilliard Blanning Wysocki and Assoc., under the name of Consumer Alliance for a Strong Economy. The firm is co-managed by Republican consultant Dave Gilliard, who has been a frequent critic of the governor.
"We've kind of built the organization, with about 10,000 on our e-mail list," said Chris Wysocki, with the firm. As for the advertising buy: "It's not huge. We're trying to make it bigger, but our thinking was somebody needed to get something out there to provide some alternative small business voice" to the one Schwarzenegger presented Monday.
Conservative blogger Jon Fleischman: I feel like a chump.
UPDATE: By the way, conservatives, the 4% payroll tax for companies that don't offer health insurance should be considered the floor, not the ceiling as negotiations begin over Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's health care plan. Already, Democrats and some progressive big companies say it could go as high as 8% to adequately cover everyone. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez acknowledged that today in a press briefing, without putting his own number on it. "Somewhere between 4% and 8% - that is where you find common ground," Nunez said.
 Here is what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office released last night under the headline, "What They Are Saying About the Governor's Health Care Proposal:"
"Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines Commends The Governor For 'Ambitious' Health Agenda. 'I commend Governor Schwarzenegger for proposing an ambitious health care reform agenda, and look forward to debating the proposals as we work toward achieving consensus on health care solutions that make sense for California's future. We are pleased the Governor has embraced free market reforms like health savings accounts, which will make coverage more affordable for workers and small business owners. His plan to increase the Medi-Cal provider rate will improve accessibility to health care, especially for rural Californians.' (Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines, Press Release, 'Statement By Assembly Republican Leader On Governor's Health Care Proposal.')"
Here is a paragraph Schwarzenegger left out from Villines' actual press release: "Imposing a new jobs tax on employers of any size and expanding costly government mandates is the wrong approach, one which will devastate our economy. We continue to agree with the Governor’s statements in 2004 when he argued that a new jobs tax will be a job killer and force many businesses to lay off workers, move out of state or close their doors for good."
(Photo: Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)
It pays to work for the government, a seemingly endless source of cash.
Looks like Molina Healthcare Inc., based in Long Beach, is the biggest winner so far under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's healthcare overhaul. The HMO provides coverage for government-funded MediCal patients in California. Molina's stock is up well over 3% in morning trading on the news the Republican governor wants to expand MediCal by 1 million people and increase MediCal reimbursements.
UPDATE: Molina now up 5%. Click here to track.
Health Net, another MediCal contractor - where Schwarzenegger's former chief of staff Pat Clarey and press secretary Margita Thompson now work - also could gain if the governor's plan goes through. But its stock is down slightly today, along with most other health plans, on fears that Schwarzenegger's proposal could shrink profits by requiring 85% of revenues to be used for patient care.
Molina, on the other hand, gets most of its revenue from MediCal contracts and, unlike Health Net, it owns and operates about 20 clinics. So it would be able to both expand its business and collect larger reimbursements for its provider services. By far, in terms of percentage of revenue growth, Molina would be the biggest beneficiary of the governor's plan.
"I think that's what we need to do. Never raise taxes, it wouldn't happen. The people of California have voted 'no' on all the tax increases this year, if it is the tobacco tax, if it is any kind of additional tax, everything was voted no on, including the nurses, as you remember, the nurses' association, they have had a proposition on there to raise taxes, everything was voted no, including, including the oil tax." - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nov. 26, 2006, on "Meet the Press."
It's been clear for a couple of weeks that Schwarzenegger was going to increase taxes - I'm sorry, my mistake ... fees -- in his $12 billion health care plan unveiled Monday. Indeed, his new plan raises taxes on businesses (that don't want to offer health insurance) $1 billion and extracts $3.7 billion from hospitals and doctors. Bill Carrick, a political consultant for Phil Angelides, calls this the "hall of fame of hypocrisies," given that Schwarzenegger was so sanctimonious about Angelides' plan to raise taxes.
In December, the administration went out of its way to tout a New America Foundation report showing nearly $1,200 in "hidden taxes" because hospitals shift the cost of treating the uninsured. It's called laying the groundwork. Now, as corporate-political consultant Dan Schnur points out to Peter Nicholas of the Times: "He needs to be able to effectively make the case that this represents a tax shift from overburdened families to businesses that aren't fulfilling their responsibilities" by not providing healthcare.
 The bomb-throwers over at the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, which is based in Santa Monica and dislikes insurance companies, today is releasing underwriting guidelines for four health insurance companies - and it's clear Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would have a nearly impossible job getting health insurance today. (The governor apparently does have insurance, however, through the Screen Actors Guild.)
The Times' Lisa Girion has the scoop right here.
The guidelines are a few years old. But FTCR said: "Under the insurer guidelines, Gov. Schwarzenegger ... would be uninsurable because of his past heart valve replacement, recent leg surgery and past occupation as an athlete." The FTCR said, "The documents show why Schwarzenegger's plan needs to force insurance companies to take all patients and must regulate the premiums charged."
The guidelines are a stone-hearted tour through dozens of illnesses, with recommendations for whether to accept or decline patients designated by a simple "x" in a box. Dashing the dreams of 5-year-olds everywhere, the following jobs have been deemed too dangerous for any coverage: semi-pro and professional athletes, deep-sea fishermen, racing drivers, flight instructors, pyrotechnicians, rodeo performers, ski patrol and war correspondents.
"It’s ironic that the governor is proposing health care for poor kids, while taking away their breakfasts. Even Republican Gov. Wilson – at the time he negotiated welfare reform – agreed that children should not suffer for the behavior of their parents." - Senate leader Don Perata (D-Oakland).
I'm sure California Republicans are thrilled that the first example of "post-partisanship" from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger involves rushing to the GOP side of the yacht and throwing illegal immigrant and welfare children over the railing. It sets a nice tone for what he thinks about Republicans. Today, Schwarzenegger walks back to the port side and throws "illegal" children a little Democratic health insurance. See, cooperation is easy!
Reporters have been sniffing out Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's healthcare plan, set to be unveiled Monday. It looks like the bootstraps governor wants the collective village to chip in for health insurance, at least for children. A few tidbits:
- Jordan Rau at the Times: Several independent sources said Schwarzenegger intends "to guarantee medical coverage for children of families earning up to 300% of the poverty level, or $60,000 a year for a family of four. Those families have 90% of the children without insurance. But the cutoff is not yet set in stone." And it would include "illegal" children. In addition, the governor wants to include new requirements for businesses to cover employees, sources said.
- Clea Benson over at the Bee also says the governor wants to allow families making less than 300% of the poverty level to enroll in Healthy Families, the government-subsidized insurance program. And Schwarzenegger is "expected to propose covering more uninsured adults by requiring individuals to have insurance and employers to help pay for that -- a model his administration refers to as 'shared responsibility.' "
- Lynda Gledhill at the Chronicle says "insiders believe the governor will endorse a requirement that employers provide health insurance despite the strong opposition it is likely to receive. ... Administration sources have said that the governor's plan will be comprehensive and aimed at universal coverage but will not be a 'take it or leave it' program."
Taking care of children is the easy part. They are relatively cheaper to insure and it's a no-brainer for a political message. (It's the fearless younger adults -- the ones who make less money and think they are invincible - who are harder to capture into the system. I'm curious about how Schwarzenegger plans to get them covered -- perhaps with a low-cost, bare-bones plan.) And what about capping runaway costs at hospitals -- mandated by the government -- and raising MediCal rates for doctors? Lots more to come.
Looking at the stories today about children, blogger Anthony Wright over at Health Access says it's about time.
Hola. In California's ongoing health care reform talks, usually Democrats are the ones who are blamed for taxes. But in what may be a hint as to the direction his own health care reform efforts are heading, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today aimed this age-old criticism at the state's existing health care system.
At a tour of the California Hospital Medical Center, Schwarzenegger said that the heavy cost of providing medical care to the uninsured, through emergency rooms and the like, is a “hidden tax”: And as you know, by federal law emergency rooms are not allowed to turn away anybody. So with the 6.5 million uninsured residents, California has a health care crisis, we have a serious crisis. In just this one hospital alone here they're sending out bills worth 60 million dollars a year that are all related to ER care, but they have not been paid. Now, multiply that out by the amount of hospitals that we have in California and it will come out with a number that goes into the billions.
Now, guess who is paying for those billions of dollars? It’s you, me, everyone is paying for that. So working families who have medical insurance get clobbered with hidden taxes; as a matter of fact, each individual pays an additional $400 to $500 on those hidden taxes, and families of four pay $1,200.
Schwarzenegger's analysis comes from a report released by the New America Foundation. But the politics of his comments are tantalizing. The governor already has declared that though he wants to help every Californian to be able to obtain health care insurance, but will not raise taxes to do so. However, IF Californians are already paying a tax by any other name through their premiums, then a number of possible solutions -- such as some versions of an employer mandate to provide coverage or a requirement that individuals purchase insurance -- could be argued as not raising taxes but as making people pay costs that others are now shouldering.
It's an argument not likely to win over the anti-tax crowd, but could give Schwarzenegger some important rhetorical wiggle room for whatever plan he presents next year. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, who is expected to release his own plan shortly, immediately lauded the perspective, saying: “We certainly agree that easing the burden of the “hidden tax” –- especially what responsible businesses pay when they offer insurance but their competitors do not –- is a priority.”
-Jordan Rau
|
|
|
Our Blogger