Sunday, June 21, 2009

Health Care discussion yesterday with Senator Mark Begich.

(Photo borrowed from Mudflats)
Alaskans who crowded the Wilda Marston Theatre on Saturday told Sen. Mark Begich overwhelmingly they wanted Congress to create a "public option" for health care as an alternative to the nation's existing system based on private insurance.


The question of whether health care reform should include a public health insurance plan to compete with private insurers is drawing intense attention. President Obama strongly favors it and most congressional Republicans are opposed, with the sides sparring over cost, fairness and quality of care.

Begich, an Alaska Democrat, on Saturday held a "town hall" forum on health care at the Anchorage venue as the debate over the issue rages nationally. Begich said there are many ways to have a public option and it doesn't mean a government takeover of the health care system. He suggested an idea that was part of his campaign for the U.S. Senate last fall: letting members of the public buy into the health benefit program federal employees use.

"It's such a big group, we are able to negotiate a lot of our cost factors," Begich said.

The theater, which has a capacity of about 230, was almost full for the forum. Begich asked audience members to raise their hands if they supported a "public option" -- which he broadly defined as something that was not owned and operated by the insurance companies. The vast majority of people raised their hands.


I attended this townhall meeting yesterday morning and was struck by the diversity of the group that gathered to hear Senator Begich, and the personal stories that I heard. It was a much more civil discussion then the one I had heard only a few days earlier in this same room concerning the equal rights ordinance, but the opinions were just as diverse and deeply felt.

Our Senator (I always want to call him Mark) made it clear that this was a very complicated issue and that new versions of the bill were being created almost on a daily basis. The message seemed to be, "don't hold your breath, because this is something that is not coming anytime soon."

That actually depressed me a little, even though I already knew that intellectually. I guess sometimes I get a little overanxious when I think a great thing is just over the horizon. (Yes I was one of those kids who did not sleep very well on Christmas eve.)

Senator Begich also talked about the different ways that health insurance can be structured to encourage people to start taking better care of themselves. He used the Safeway stores as an example, saying that they offer two different plans to their employees. One plan for the employees who do not smoke, and take the time to exercise and eat right, and another more expensive plan for the people who start the day with a donut and a Marlboro cigarette.

Now as some do you may know I am a HUGE advocate for exercise and eating right. In my mind that is "health care" and what the doctors and hospitals do is "sick care". Once you need the help of the medial profession you are no longer receiving real health care.

So here is my lame brained idea, see what you think.

I would also like to see health insurance offered that took into consideration a person's lifestyle.

But I would like to see that idea expanded on.

I would like larger corporations to really encourage and facilitate more healthy lifestyle choices for their employees. I would like to see running tracks and work out facilities on their premises (Google does this). I would like the company to offer benefits to those employees who take the time to exercise at least three to five hours a week, and pay them to do it right there at the work site (One of the main reasons I hear for people not working out is that they are too busy and simply do not have the time, but if your job paid you to work out at least three hours a week that excuse would no longer be valid).

I would like them to provide personal trainers and dietitians to help the employees to access this healthier lifestyle, and have cafeteria's that offer fresh fruit and vegetable, lean meats, and healthy carbohydrates.

This may seem costly at first, but just imagine how much the company would save with fewer sick days, more productivity, and a happier healthier work environment. The amount the company pays for health care could be adjusted to suit their more healthier work force and the savings would easily offset the cost of the facility, the time spent exercising, and the personal trainers.

Overall this attitude and change in behavior would potentially save the company hundreds of thousands, or depending on its size, millions of dollars. And it would save our country billions of dollars.

Now I know that right about now you are thinking that Gryphen has gone off of the deep end, NO company will make such a fundamental change in their company's philosophy, but it is already happening. And what is more I have already done the same thing in a few of my work places. I have introduced healthy eating and exercise programs that have helped my co-workers lose weight, eat healthier, and feel much better about themselves. The result was a much happier and energetic work environment that had both higher productivity and employee retention numbers. I know it can work, and I believe it should be a large part of President Obama's health care program. Because I believe we should focus on "health care" and not just "sick care".

And that is exactly what I am going to tell Jule Hasquet, Mark Begich's Communication Director, later on this week when I call her with this proposal. Wish me luck!

18 comments:

  1. Anonymous8:41 AM

    When, oh when is the iceberg going to strike?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:42 AM

    Gryphen, corporations generally don't care about their employees, that has been my experience. Twice I became disabled and twice I was screwed out of long term disability benefits. Twice, I went without insurance for over a year after filing a claim for social security disability benefits. Twice, my claim was finally approved 16+ months later. And twice, I paid an attorney's fee for help with each claim.

    The first corporation I worked at fired me the day I went on a leave of absence, until the personnel office found my doctor's note in the interoffice mail. After 13 years off work, I wanted to try to work again. I made it!! But after nearly 3 years on the job, the second corporation would not provide me with an ergonomics workstation evaluation as I was beginning to lose muscle tone and work became harder, pain was escalating. Then it became necessary for that plate and 3 screws in the spine; that surgery put me off work permanently in pain 24/7 and no pain medicine helps relieve the pain more than 2 weeks.

    The first time around, Medicare was retroactive back to the date of the disability. And a few years later, I became eligible for Medicaid along with my two young kids. The second time around, I was penalized for 29 months before Medicare became effective. I paid approx. $400/mo Cobra for nearly 15 months. No Medicaid available now because I am not a pregnant woman or a woman with breast cancer.

    Sorry for the ramblin'. I have left out a whole bunch. But I learned through it all that the laws are written to protect the corporations, not the employees. Even ADA lawsuits are usually won by corporations, i.e., Williams vs. Toyota which was reversed by the Supreme Court.

    I strongly advocate for a national health care system. Thanks, Gryphen.

    ReplyDelete
  3. OT...Happy Pappy's DAy!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jackie9:01 AM

    I think it's a great idea and in line with what President Obama talked about. I think one way that would help sell it to business would be some kind of tax credit, because they are taking on extra costs to run such a program, which they should be able to deduct but the incentive of tax credits is always nice...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous9:07 AM

    Not a good start. The mentality is already turning to the mindset of making it too expensive for people who smoke or are overweight. This then becomes something similar to the insurance companies' experience statistics on insurance. It's the wrong approach and is only pretending to be a solution for the problem. And that's not to say that people shouldn't be encouraged to lead healthier lifestyles.

    I rather doubt much will be accomplished and it's simply because Americans who have are really not interested in helping out those who haven't. It's just something different from what happens in Canada. Don't take this as an insult Americans, take it as the truth of which most of you are proud.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Our system is just nuts. I went on disability for something that was entirely preventable if our legislators had passed legislation to prevent my employer from harming me. Then I went on SSDI. I needed health care, but had to wait about two years to get medicare. My SSDI benefit was too high to qualify qualify for medicaid(even though I was barely surviving). During those two years I could have worked on recovering and getting back to work, but no, no health care for me. The other thing that I had not realized before I ended up on disability myself is when your income is low the type of foods you can afford are often full of sugar and fat. This of course harms your health even more. In Alaska being low income is very difficult as far as housing goes also, especially in the rural areas where landlords to not go by the landlord tenant act. I have been homeless three times. This has also made my health worse. The system rather than rehabilitate me relatively quickly to get back in the workforce has done the exact opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous10:10 AM

    The above personal experiences show our current system is broken. We have to try out new ideas. I expect some corporations will continue to try and screw over their employees, but more and more, they can expect a high turnover of their qualified personnel who will demand decent benefits for themselves and their families.

    Somewhat off-topic: The businesses who put aside a room or two, and hire qualified child-care professionals experience almost zero turnover when they allow their employees to bring their pre-school children to work.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I may have meandered little while I was typing this post, but my main point is that we spend billions of dollars to provide Americans with medications to solve problems that could be prevented with good nutrition and exercise.

    The true scandal here is that there is so much profit in the diet industry and viagara sales that nobody wants to solve these problems organically.

    No wonder our insurance premiums are so high.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous1:10 PM

    Well, Gryphen, I recently found out by word of mouth about Max Gerson. I watched a documentary film on the internet via netflix (sp) called The Beautiful Truth (2008). It was about a young teenage boy from Alaska. He had problems in the public school system, so he was home schooled by his father. One of his projects was about Max Gerson's cure for cancer discovery in 1928. A friend of his father asked to file the documentary about his research and adventures. FDA has failed us all. Shame this young man's home school project went unnoticed, while Bristol and Levi have received all the limelight.

    Oh, and don't get me started about viagara. It wouldn't be nice!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous2:58 PM

    Gryphen,

    I agree w/ health incentives, and I strongly disagree with a public health option the likes of the Federal Employee Benefit program.

    Why? Well, I am a licensed insurance agent and work for one of the "big bad private health insurers". If a public option is put out there with free access (I don't mean cost "free", but eligibility to get in), it WILL put private companies at risk for going out of business which in turn equals massive job losses. I work for an insurer with approx 3 million members, and approx 4500 employees, plus another 16,000 licensed independent brokers who make their living sell our products. Multiply that by another 3 insurance companies in my state, and you can see there are thousands of livelihoods at stake.

    Second, we CANNOT afford to insure people to the level of Federal Employee Benefits. This is partially what got us in this mess to start with. When people do not have hardly any financial stake in the care they receive, other than paying their monthly premium (read $10 copay and walk out), we over utilize and do not worry about the cost.

    Third, overlaying a federal public plan with guarantee issue DOES NOT address the broken regulations in each of the 50 states, especially with regard to purchasing an individual health plan. It is not fair that you can't buy maternity coverage in Texas, but can in CA. It is not fair that you do not get "rated up" for health in WA state, but do in CA. It is not fair that someone who purchases in AZ can have a condition permanently exluded forever on their policy.

    I would much more propose a task force to go thru all 50 states' individual insurance regulations and standardize them so you are treated and underwritten equivalently no matter what state you are in. Then, I would do an overlay public Federal Benefit option with LIMITED access; ie, those who fall out of private insurance underwriting guidelines (which would be looser and insure more people post standardization) and also those who are poor. Each state could then get rid of their own respective "high risk pool" insurance option. I would also require every insurer in the nation to pay in a percentage of premium collected to help support the national limited access plan.

    Additionally, there would be an individual mandate to purchase insurance, because the whole premise of insurance is that the healthy help pay for the sick. You don't get to wait until AFTER a car accident to go get car insurance, and neither should people be allowed to do this with health insurance.

    Add in your healthy incentives, tort reform, technology improvements, provider payment reform, and we may then be on our way to true reform without socializing medicine and having the government run our healthcare system.

    Last thought: If you want to see what the government does with efficiency and cost effective measures, feel free to check the 615 page Kennedy Senate Draft Bill....PLUS go anytime to Medicare.gov and start reading the REAMS of clinical criteria required for Medicare payment and all of the Medicare Payment Policies. TRUST me, you do not want the government running ALL of our healthcare, nor do you want them putting private insurers out of business, because then they will be the only ones left running our healthcare system.

    Sorry this is so long!!!

    Tami

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous3:17 PM

    Yes anon, there is a secret CIA conspiracy afoot to hide the cure for Cancer. And Viagra is the devil's own remedy!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't want an insurance program. Insurance has nothing to do with medical care.

    I just want access to medical care when I need it.

    With all due respect to those who work in the insurance industry, we now have a "health care industry." Health care is huge business and the doctor or nurse is only a tiny part of it. Read HIPAA to find out how many people get involved between the doctor and the patient and have an obligation to protect health information. TONS!

    Insurance is a racket. The only reason it "works" is because on the whole, people pay in a lot more than they take out and so it is a money-making enterprise. Insurance has given rise to business partnerships, clearinghouses, adjusters -- people handling medical records only because they are passing invoices and payments back and forth. Insurance has created the need for statisticians, quality control specialists, legal advisors, and pencil pushers of all kinds.

    Insurance has nothing to do with health (or sick) care. And that's one of the main reasons why it's proving so hard to improve the system so people can get help from a doctor when they need it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous at 2:58 said there should be a mandate for me to purchase insurance. Wow. Some health care reform. Now we have a for-profit industry that the populace MUST become customers of.

    I do understand that health care has to be paid for, and it should be paid for with taxes.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous10:59 PM

    Onething,

    If we pay for healthcare strictly through taxes, do you also want your auto insurance paid that way too? Same difference, almost every state has an auto insurance mandate. Once again, go look at the Medicare Regs if you really think you want the government between you and your medical care. It won't be any easier, nor will it be cheaper. Watch your tax rates go through the roof to boot.

    Same Anon at 2:58~

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous11:00 PM

    BTW, I should clarify: I work for NON-PROFIT insurer :)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous8:32 AM

    One of the big arguments the 'for-profit' healthcare supporters use is telling people that the government will be between you and your doctor. Americans don't seem to want to stop and think how meaningless that statement really is. In Canada the government is quite invisible in healthcare as far as the patient is concerned. What is more like the truth in the U.S. is that the insurance company is between the patient and the doctor. And in a very meaningful and intrusive way. The insurance companies are telling people who are sick or injured just how much they can afford to have their doctor do for them. That's if a person can even afford to have insurance.

    Beware of any anon who claims that their insurance company is non-profit. Unless anon is claiming that he/she works for no wages or salary. Beware of all efforts by anons to preserve the current failing for-profit system.

    ReplyDelete
  17. SarahQ...I always enjoy your posts..especially the health care ones. I am so very weary of explaining our Canadian system...and trying to get people to understand that I go to the doc of my choice. He and he alone (with me of course) decides what type of treatments I will recieve. Then...I receive them. We live in NOrthern Manitoba, and my husband is having a bypass at th end of July. He was only diagnosed in June. so the time waits espoused by so many is another misnomer. Elective surgeries may wait a bit...but others dont.

    We were out of province a few years back, and stupidly left our MB health card at home. Hubby needed immediate medical care...stitches...and was told...dont worry about the card. Send us the number when you get home...IF you remember.

    My employer pays less EI premiums because he supplies his employees with a benefit plan. We as staff...pay a few dollars a month. He pays the rest. We are covered for private hospital rooms...chiro care..dental care...free prescription drugs...therapeutic massage...health insurance while out of country...ambulance fees...wheel chairs..crutches...anything you can think of. We have short and long term disability added in. Hubby has an even better plan...and we are covered by both.

    Yes folks...Canadians pay more in taxes. We have a high standard of living...excellent wages for most people...and a social network for those who fall through the cracks who have a need. Our homeless can go to any clinic or hospital and never fear that they will not be treated.

    I am willing to pay those extra taxes, so that my Canadian family call all have access to health care. As you said Sarah...the government is invisible in all of this.

    Oh. and not once ever in my 56 years, have I been given a bill for anything. I suffered from anorexia/bulima for many years. I spent 6 months in a world renowned treatment centre...cost? Nothing. I was the director of a residential alcohol and drug treatment centre for 12 years. Cost to clients? Nothing.

    A few more tax dollars makes all the difference in the world to people who would otherwise have no healthcare.

    Laurie

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous11:23 AM

    TEAM CANADA!

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.