Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There’s a hot new study out of UMass that says creating a single state government insurer would save PA residents about $1000 a year on their health care spending, and reduce total spending by about 11%
The full MIT study is available by link in the Keystone article above.
Obviously, PA isn't about to try the experiment anytime soon: its governor, Tom Corbett, is a Republican who has just recently declined to participate in the ACA Medicaid expansion or state-run insurance exchange, and both chambers of the state legislature have GOP majorities who will (probably) back him on both decisions.
Nonetheless, as a theoretical example of a large state's implementation of a single-payer system, equivalent to the Canadian model in being state-based, it provides some interesting policy-wonk fodder.
In practice, single-payer state plans are more likely to tried first in smaller states: in Oregon, where the governor John Kitzhaber has been a national leader in health-provision reform and innovation, there is a significant and growing movement for a single-payer system. Vermont, led by Gov. Peter Shumlin, may well be the first state to implement such a plan.
The role of the states is often described as "laboratories of democracy", and in the area of health-insurance reform, that appears to be exactly correct. A key, however, will be the willingness of the federal government to issue waivers to the ACA to allow such experiments to take place - and that of course depends on who controls the federal government.
The full MIT study is available by link in the Keystone article above.
Obviously, PA isn't about to try the experiment anytime soon: its governor, Tom Corbett, is a Republican who has just recently declined to participate in the ACA Medicaid expansion or state-run insurance exchange, and both chambers of the state legislature have GOP majorities who will (probably) back him on both decisions.
Nonetheless, as a theoretical example of a large state's implementation of a single-payer system, equivalent to the Canadian model in being state-based, it provides some interesting policy-wonk fodder.
In practice, single-payer state plans are more likely to tried first in smaller states: in Oregon, where the governor John Kitzhaber has been a national leader in health-provision reform and innovation, there is a significant and growing movement for a single-payer system. Vermont, led by Gov. Peter Shumlin, may well be the first state to implement such a plan.
The role of the states is often described as "laboratories of democracy", and in the area of health-insurance reform, that appears to be exactly correct. A key, however, will be the willingness of the federal government to issue waivers to the ACA to allow such experiments to take place - and that of course depends on who controls the federal government.
I'd rather spend the extra grand and be able to make my own choices than save a few bucks and let politicians decide what I need for medical care.
I will make health decisions based on health.
Politicians will make health decisions based on politics.
"Canada has been able to develop a fairly successful system of healthcare rationing by balancing the conflicting concerns of equal access and cost efficiency, federal funding and provincial control, and public sector management and private sector provision. Financial constraints limit the kinds of services included within the notion of equal access, however, forcing healthcare providers to make difficult choices about who will receive a particular healthcare service"
A key, however, will be the willingness of the federal government to issue waivers to the ACA to allow such experiments to take place - and that of course depends on who controls the federal government.
The irony here is that Romney said he would issue blanket waivers, while the Obama admin might be reluctant to let a state go off on its own.
The irony here is that Romney said he would issue blanket waivers, while the Obama admin might be reluctant to let a state go off on its own.
Yes, ironic. But the indications are that Sibelius will issue the necessary waivers to both Oregon and Vermont as needed. But since neither state will be ready to try single-payer before 2017, and Romney's assurances obviously no longer matter to anyone, the real question is whether the next administration, of whichever party, is willing to do the same.
How does the USA ration healthcare for someone that has insurance?
This is an elementary question the answer to which is readily available to anyone with an internet connection - frankly I can't be bothered to provide you with something you should already know. Go look it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
