Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Malloy Upgrades to Universal Health Care

Dan Malloy today announces his plan to provide universal access to health care for Connecticut citizens. You can read his full plan on the Malloy for Governor website.

The plan is very similar to an earlier proposal by rival John DeStefano. Malloy initially planned to grant universal health care access only to children, but has since, perhaps spurred by DeStefano's plan, broadened the scope of the plan to include everyone.

The ultimate goals of the two plans are the same: universal access to health care. The differences, as this graphic shows, are mostly in the nuts and bolts.
A key difference between the Malloy and DeStefano plans is how to pay for medical care that has become so expensive some state legislatures have largely avoided even attempting universal coverage.

DeStefano said he can fund the entire $350 million program by closing corporate tax loopholes, an idea Rell's campaign says simply equates to an increase in corporate taxes.
...
By contrast, Malloy will avoid a direct corporate tax increase but said businesses can decide voluntarily to spend up to 1 percent of their payrolls to join the state employee health insurance pool - an idea pushed repeatedly by former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Curry. The idea is that small businesses would have access to lower insurance premiums by buying into a large insurance pool.

Malloy is also calling for Connecticut to raise its cigarette tax by 63 percent - to the same level as neighboring Rhode Island, at $2.46 per pack. ... Malloy's plan says the cigarette increase not only would generate more taxes, but would contribute to improved health.
...
Malloy would cover nearly half of the uninsured simply by expanding Medicaid, making far more people eligible by increasing the income thresholds. As a result, adults earning 200 percent of the federal poverty level - rather than 100 percent - would become eligible for adult coverage, Malloy said.

Rather than expand Medicaid, DeStefano would create the Connecticut HealthCare Consortium as a "one-stop marketplace" for businesses, families, and individuals to purchase health insurance coverage in a large pool.(Keating)

Just how much more can politicians flog the cigarette tax, which essentially is a way for government to take advantage of addicts, to fund their projects? I wasn't fond of Rell's attempts to raise "sin taxes" either. Government shouldn't legislate morality.

That's an aside, however. Both plans are well-intentioned, and would be better than the patchwork system we have now. Unfortunately, neither plan is really a solution. The Malloy plan's funding, which partially comes from cigarette taxes and tobacco settlement money, is on a very shaky foundation, as is DeStefano's. Corporate tax loopholes may be closed, but what if the economy tanks? What if businesses relocate to North Carolina? What if people stop buying as many cigarettes, or the tobacco settlement money dries up?

Yet, both plans are steps in the right direction. They are full of new and innovative ways of providing care and funding the program. Not all may be workable, and many may need a good deal of debate and refinement. However, Gov. Rell has yet to address health care in any meaningful fashion, and the federal government seems stuck in park on issues of concern to the vast majority of Americans. Neither plan is perfect, but it's better than the status quo.

I would like to see the General Assembly debate the merits of a universal health care plan in the 2007 session, no matter who wins the gubernatorial election.

Sources

"Dan Malloy Announces Plan for Universal Health Care in Connecticut." Press Release. Malloy for Governor. 7 June, 2006.

Keating, Christopher. "In Governor's Race, Duel Over Health Care." Hartford Courant 7 June, 2006.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Like I keep saying the pols are all about how you pay for it and do little to nothing in talking about lowering the costs of what is bought and paid for by insurance - and 85% of CT citizens have plus the emergency care for all - by going after the poor quality assurance and the over utilization of services as part of that. There is an argument that the butt tax will produce less sickies but that still doesn't address the quality and utilization issues....that nobody has the political will to address or the understanding of the delivery system to do it....

Anonymous said...

BTW, Rell won't be out-trmped on this as she has signed up Mickey Herbert of Bluefish and Physicians Health Services fame. PHS was started up in a little office in Fairfield with newly minted MBA Herbert backed by doctor money - the doctors saw Kaiser and other HMO's moving in and they wanted to control their own destiny and get a piece of the action as well. The company didn't last long; just long enough for the docs to protect their turf and make their dough - survives today as an acquisition by HealthNet - and it never did anything to get costs under control. Herbert's only real entrepeneurial venture was the Bluefish - and the City of Bridgeport propped them up for years until he sold out recently...

Anonymous said...

BR said on the earlier thread:For me..neither health plan is adaquate. There should be universal healthcare in a sponsored state single payer arrangement...run by the state...and funded by corporate taxes. but for me Medicare is a single payor system and it is extremely expensive notwithstanding the much touted 3% administration costs....so I would need to hear a little more before I cast my vote...I am still trying to hang on to a free market solution with better regulatory stuff to lower costs while improving quality..call me an idealist if you will...

Anonymous said...

Nice spin BD...

Anonymous said...

I posted this earlier today on another thread but there have been problems with DSS and the HMO's that administer HUSKY and Blumie seems to be the only guy saying something needs to be done and something can be done but as AG he isn't going to say what to do...i.e. he isn't going to make or propose policy...

Genghis Conn said...

Well, according to a DeStefano press release from April 13th, Malloy said this:

"There are 400,000 people without insurance in the state of Connecticut. The rest of the state has insurance, the idea that we need to replace that system overnight and as a single state, doesn't make any sense to me," says Dannel Malloy, (D) for Governor.

Malloy at that time was concentrating on providing health coverage for children right away, and he made a big deal out of the fact that his plan wouldn't have to wait.

Genghis Conn said...

Then again, Malloy said this in an April 7th email to supporters:

He said, "Today I am calling on Governor Rell to convene a high-level panel of experts -- top legislative leaders, health care experts, workers and members of the business community and others -- to meet with our colleagues in Massachusetts who crafted that plan to see what parts of that plan would work here in Connecticut and to begin working on developing a health care plan for our State. The Massachusetts plan may not be perfect and may not have all the right elements we need in Connecticut, but there is much from that plan and the process they followed that can help us achieve our goal of universal health care."

He also said on January 26:

Malloy added: "Over the years, our health care problems have escalated into a crisis, with little to nothing being done to alleviate them," said Malloy. "Insuring the 71,000 children in our State who currently lack health care coverage is just a starting point, albeit a critical one. The ultimate goal must be to provide coverage to the 300,000 adults who also lack access to affordable health care as well."

Anonymous said...

The notion of "affordable healthcare" to these politicians means that nobody but some entity other than the person who receives it pays for it and understands what it is and what it costs.