My friend Ethel is mad as hell, but she has no choice but to keep taking it. She's mad at her health insurance company, and she's mad at the administration and Congress. She's equally mad at Democrats and Republicans. It's not partisan; it's personal.
Ethel had breast cancer five years ago. Knock on wood and keep the evil eye away, she is doing fine. Health-wise, that is. Financially, it's a completely different story. Financially, it's a disaster.
Ethel is not one of those people who doesn't have health insurance. Actually, she's kind of tired of all the attention Democrats have been paying to the folks who don't have health insurance, who show up at the emergency room and expect to be taken care of, and then have someone else pay the costs. She's the someone else, and she knows it.
But she's just as tired of all those Republicans who claim they're the party of small business and say the market will take care of everything. She knows better. It's not taking care of anything.
Ethel owns a small store. You can find her there seven days a week. She works, and she worries. She pays more than $900 a month for individual health insurance. It's a lousy policy: huge deductible, huge co-pays and a very limited network of doctors.
Excuse me — she paid $900 a month. If Anthem Blue Cross (That is what they are called here in California. Ethel has another name for them, but it can't be included in a family newspaper.) has its way, she'll be paying 39 percent more every month. Anthem has just announced a rate increase for its individual policyholders, the people who don't work for big companies and don't belong to any groups. Individual coverage is the most expensive you can buy — if you can buy it.
Ethel keeps paying every month because she knows darn well that the company would like nothing better than the chance to drop her. If she didn't already have insurance, they wouldn't sell it to her. She can't change policies or companies. So she sold her car to pay for her insurance.
For two years, after having breast cancer no less, she didn't have a sonogram — even though the doctor said the mammogram wouldn't work with dense breasts — because her insurance wouldn't cover it and she couldn't afford it.
She gets teary as she tells me. So do I.
Who is helping me, she asks. She has written letters to her senators. In return, she gets form letters telling her how hard they are working to make sure every American has access to health insurance. Right.
An increase of 39 percent on top of the $900-plus she is already paying is beyond the pale. But there is a reason for it. My sister has worked in the field for years. Much as I'd like to chalk it all up to greed, much as that might make for good raw meat in a liberal crowd, she taught me long ago that it's a whole lot more complicated than that.
Ethel can't drop her insurance because she's been sick once. But what's happening in the individual market, in the midst of this continuing recession, is that the healthy people in that pool are deciding they can't afford it anymore and are going uninsured. As the younger and healthier people drop out, the pool of individuals gets older and sicker, meaning it costs more to provide the same coverage. Could it be as much as 39 percent more? It could.
I tried to tell Ethel that the president's plan would help her, but she just laughed. All he cares about are the people with no insurance, she said. I don't think that's true, but what can I say? I still don't know exactly what's in — or out — of the Democratic plan, and we both know it isn't going to pass in its current form anyway. I told her she'll be worse off without the Democratic plan, whatever it is, but she doesn't believe that, either. Now that Anthem has announced the increase, I might be right, but that's hardly a victory for anyone.
Republicans may be crowing now about defeating health care, but they should beware what they wish for. Saying no when the other side has 60 votes is one thing. Just saying no doesn't work anymore. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If Republicans don't find a way to work with Democrats in creating a bigger and healthier pool for Ethel, she might decide that the plague belongs on both their houses. And she'd be right.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

|
 |
Comments
|
8 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
I guess it has come down to this in America. If you want to live, you must be prepared to give up everything you have worked for. AFter all, life is worth more than a car, a home, a small business, retirement savings etc., right? I could accept this state of affairs if everyone faced the same consequences of serious illness, but they don't. The inequality of sacrifice, based on the inequality of earnings, is simply immoral. If we as a nation cannot come up with a way to provide life-saving care to all our people without stripping them of the fruits of their life's labor, then we can lay no claim to being a civilized society. We may as well be living in the Dark Ages.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Laurie Craw
Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:28 AM
|
|
|
|
What are you suggesting we do for your friend, Susan? Pay for her health care? Require insurance companies to take a loss on her policy (which is another way of saying 'we pay for her health care')?
What if her car had been wrecked, and she couldn't afford to replace it, even though she needs to drive for her business... Should we bail her out? You can think of innumerable financial tragedies that might wreak havoc with your finances, but providing a safety net for every American is something we, as a nation and a society, can't afford or manage efficiently.
It is an oxymoron that a government program can genuinely and judiciously and prudently help people such as your friend without *intruding*. If we look to government for that kind of 'help', the inevitable consequence is ceding control over our lives and self-dependence to a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy.
A reasonable middle ground would be to allow her to join a large pool with which to spread the health care risk, but that's not what the now-dead Obamacare bill featured in its 2000+ page versions.
Most hospitals will give (actually, sell) you needed care at reduced rates with very very long payment plans, so you shouldn't be in a position to forego lifesaving care. I don't know if that's the case for all hospitals, everywhere, but lots of them do just that.
Comment: #2
Posted by: bob elkind
Wed Feb 10, 2010 1:45 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Laurie Craw
Laurie Craw writes in comment #1: ... If we as a nation cannot come up with a way to provide life-saving care to all our people without stripping them of the fruits of their life's labor, then we can lay no claim to being a civilized society. We may as well be living in the Dark Ages.... How do we do as you suggest, Laurie, without stripping *someone else* of the fruits of *their* life's labours? What would *that* be called? If an individual did that, it's called "theft", but if the *government* does that, it's called "fair" ?
Comment: #3
Posted by: bob elkind
Wed Feb 10, 2010 1:54 AM
|
|
|
|
Hey Susan, wahat bob elkand said is true in south GA. I've got $650/month bcbs with a 10k deductable per person per year policy. The truth is, though, i've had 2 trips to the hospital where they financed the 10k for $100/month with no interest. My employee has a hospital card based on income that was paying 100% till minimum wage went up, now its 85%. It aint great sometimes but overall, its manageable.
Comment: #4
Posted by: wade
Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:58 AM
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if you realize it Susan, but you made a pretty convincing argument that the current attempt at health-care reform is extremely misguided, and we'd be better off with what the Republicans had proposed. The thing that would help your friend is making health insurance affordable for everyone, so that even the healthy choose to buy it. Things like tort reform will bring down everyone's premiums, and if done right, will still protect those who are legitimate victims of negligence. Allowing catastrophic care only insurance (sort of like collision only for auto insurance) would draw in the young and healthy. If I'm 23, I have no reason to pay for insurance that covers mammograms, colonoscopies, and other procedures which are generally for the elderly. But I'd sure like to have coverage in case I get hit by that bus. Chances are I'll never use the insurance, but that $1000 (or whatever the premium would be for a year) certainly buys me some peace of mind. And people who buy those types of premiums will reduce your friend's premium as well. I dont mean to imply that the Republicans have all the answers. Obviously protection for pre-existing conditions is important as well. But the democrats went in the wrong direction on this one.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Kevin
Wed Feb 10, 2010 9:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Why not get rid of antiquated federal law that requires that an invididual is a "group of one?" Want tp know why individual coverage is so high?
http://visceralrebellion.wordpress.com/2010/01/27/how-to-fix-health-insurance-w-no-govt-required/
Comment: #6
Posted by: MarieE
Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:06 PM
|
|
|
|
Actually what would make your friend better is if she had died right? It is the current system, the profiteering system, that created the technology that kept her alive, allowed her to survive something that historically would have killed her. It sucks that her premiums are high but at least she is around to need insurance. We are consistently looking at this issue backwards. Without the money to be made in the healthcare industry there will not be the type of advancements we have seen in the last 50 years. The absolute truth that no one will even breath on television is that Medicare is the root of the healthcare problem. Medicare has distorted the market and set the standard for how medical care is administered and totally destroyed price competition.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Aaron
Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Medicare is made up of several "parts" that offer various benefits, including hospital insurance, medical insurance for doctors' services, and prescription drug coverage. For me health Insurance is really important whether it is for human beings i personally prefer student health insurance take a look on this.
http://healthinsuranceforstudents.us
Comment: #8
Posted by: sharal.sam
Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|