The health care reform debate continues, and really, given the horse-trading and logrolling that's likely to occur in the upcoming conference committee to reconcile the House and Senate versions of each chamber's health care reform bill, assuming each chamber approves them, to cite a phrase used by political science professor Larry Sabato, the party's just begun.A bit jaded by it all? Don't be -- it's just the political process at work, and here's one, major positive to take out of the health care reform bill's passage: a new policy that will finally end the 'tax' that U.S. citizens and businesses pay for uninsured Americans who obtain health care services.
This 'hidden health care tax' increases at the rate of $1,354 per second or $116.98 million per day. As of Friday, the American people have been charged $33.37 billion this year to pay for health care for the uninsured: that's the bill that hospitals pass on to those who have insurance.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, has posted a Hidden Health Care Tax meter on her web site, based on data compiled by Families USA, a national nonprofit, non-partisan organization whose goal is high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans.
Here's how these charges occur: Say an auto repair specialist works at an auto repair shop and his employer doesn't offer a health insurance plan. He cuts his hand at work, and since he doesn't have a regular physician, he's taken to a hospital emergency room, where he's treated. In the metro New York area, the emergency room care is $1,000 per hour and up, depending on which hospital you use. The hospital treats him, then recovers that cost through higher overall charges to others.
The health care reform legislation will, over time, eliminate this untenable and costly practice, by enabling those who currently use emergency rooms for primary care to obtain care in a far less costly way: by regular visits to their family physician.
When one considers the enormous cost of emergency room care of the uninsured, it's utterly astounding how the United States has not implemented a universal health care system decades ago.
Cramer on BloggingStocks: This bullish retail story looks like a good fit 
Top growth fund manager sours on Apple, U.S. tech
New Facebook share structure hints at IPO
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-12-2009 @ 5:21PM
Chris said...
The worker would be covered by worker's compensation since it was an on the job injury. These types of health costs are covered by worker's comp premiums so they have no relevance to the health insurance debate. Why are politicians SO scared of addressing tort reform? I think we all know the answer to that one. There is no SINGLE cause of high rates and no silver bullet to make the system perfect yet many think the enacting a public option will solve the problems and there will be no negative effects. They are mistaken.
10-10-2009 @ 12:44AM
al coholic said...
Let me first say that a national health plan seems to be inevitable. But the costs will be staggering. For example, you said,
"The health care reform legislation will, over time, eliminate this untenable and costly practice, by enabling those who currently use emergency rooms for primary care to obtain care in a far less costly way: by regular visits to their family physician."
Actually most hospital systems have found a work around for the people who try to use the emergency room as their local doctor. At triage they are re-routed to an outpatient area where, if they hang around for long hours, they can see someone who can help them.
By the way Chris, not all workers are covered by comp. Small companies are exempt if they have a low number of emplyees and owners can also opt out to save money. I'm sure(chuckle, chuckle) that was the situation in Joe's example. So it turns out that your comment was the non relevant one.
10-10-2009 @ 1:22AM
MoeJoe said...
How much a day do you Americans pay for the war? Bailouts? I think this is a much needed drop in the bucket.
10-12-2009 @ 10:17AM
Chris said...
al coholic:
In the example given, an auto repair shop in New York, they would HAVE to have worker's comp by law. Size is not an issue if they company has employees, either 1 or 1,000. People just throw around these examples and figures and everyone seems to sheepishly accept them.
10-10-2009 @ 7:49PM
Miguel said...
Families USA is hardly non-partisan. Their board of directors include members of the SEIU, GLAAD, the National Immigration Forum, Common Cause (which is headed by a former Democratic Congressman), CCMC (which is dedicated to helping non-profits use media to affect governmental policy change...policies like, I dunno, health care), and PSI Family Services (think ACORN partnered with DSHS). Sure, they're not sponsors of (on paper) either party, but I'd hardly call those sorts of agendas and agencies--SEIU, GLAAD, NIF are all left of center, if not far left--centrist. You've bought the lie that Pelosi is trying to sell you. Good research.
Tort reform is the way to go, but it's better to bleed the American taxpayer dry and destroy the competition already taking place in the free insurance market.
10-11-2009 @ 12:28PM
John Mylant said...
I have been in health care & where we are going is not a good thing!
John Mylant
http://mylantsmoneyblog.typepad.com/
10-11-2009 @ 9:51PM
xfrosch said...
This comment thread itself is an indication of how we got here and where we are going. Americans resent paying for anything that does not contribute directly to their own personal comfort or luxury, and the rest of the world be damned. If people get sick or injured, they should just have been more careful. If they don't have insurance, maybe they should go out and work for a living and quit sitting on their lazy asses. The LAST thing they should do is expect society to look out for them or enact any social programs that impinge on my precious, precious tax refunds.
This society is falling apart, and all most people want to do is sit and bitch that the money to fix it should come from somewhere else. I personally don't mind paying my taxes; it's part of living in a civilized society. It's too bad that civilization has become so underappreciated in America.
11-09-2009 @ 4:26PM
JeffW said...
It is unclear to me who should ideally pay the $33.37 billion that uninsured have cost so far this year. It seems that the choices are:
a) government
b) private insurers
Right now, it seems that private insurers are passing the costs on as higher premiums. Why should the government take on this cost?
The bigger question is, will the government efficiently assume this cost (without costing billions more in overhead and throwing many kitchen sinks in) and will the private insurers then pass on the 'savings' to the policy holders?
I have to assume Pelosi is creating a giant beaurocracy that will cost far more than the $40 billion per year we're silently 'spending' on uninsured people today without the government's help. We'll end up worse than before. Someone must always be paying.