Decrease in health insurance enrollment costs lives

Posted by:

Until recently, the nation was making headway in providing health insurance for more people. The Trump administration, however, is doing its best to reverse that trend, and it’s costing us lives.

At the end of 2017, 28.9 million Americans under the age of 65 were without health insurance, a big improvement over 2010, when 48.6 million were uninsured, but the number of uninsured Americans is about to increase. The Congressional Budget Office projects that by the end of this year, 32.9 million people under the age of 65 will be uninsured. That number increases to 35.9 million in 2020 and 40.9 million in 2021.

This is big problem for reasons I’ll explain shortly. It exists because the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, passed in December 2017, eliminated the individual mandate that was part of the Affordable Care Act. In turn, fewer people enrolled, and premiums went up. Some enrollees, whose incomes increased, no longer qualified for government assistance and could not afford the premiums. In addition, federal funds were slashed for navigators, the people who assist enrollees with the application process.

What was the reason behind repealing the individual mandate and trying to scuttle the ACA in general? Expense. The CBO projected in November 2017 that repealing the individual mandate would save $338 billion between 2018 and 2027. But conservatives didn’t have a problem the following month giving up $1.5 trillion in tax revenue, benefitting mostly the top one percent.

“This is about freedom,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., stated in mid-2017, “whether we as Americans should be free to buy what kind of insurance we want. … And it’s about whether the individual knows best or government knows best.” With his income, Paul can afford all the autonomy and insurance he wants.

Beyond the cost, conservatives just don’t believe government should be involved in healthcare. As the Economist put it in a Dec. 11, 2016, publication, the ACA “is the sort of redistributive economics that is anathema” to Republican ideology.

Bad things happen when people don’t have health insurance. The Institute of Medicine estimated in 2002 that over 18,000 Americans between 25 and 64 die annually because of lack of health insurance. A study published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2009 found that nearly 45,000 people in the same age bracket died in 2005 for reasons associated with lack of health insurance and that the uninsured have a 40 percent increased risk of death.

Why the higher mortality rate? The uninsured are more likely to go without the healthcare they need. When they do seek care, they often go to an emergency department. They are less likely to have a usual source of healthcare and, consequently, don’t receive preventative care. Fortunately, these problems decrease when people become eligible for Medicare.

Here’s how David H. Gorski, surgical oncologist at the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit, puts it: “I’ve seen more women than I can remember who waited far longer than they should have to see a doctor for their breast cancer because they couldn’t afford it. … when they finally do present, their tumors are larger, more difficult to treat, and more likely to kill them.”

While the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986 requires hospitals to provide emergency treatment to anyone regardless of ability to pay, emergency rooms are designed to handle acute problems, not provide preventative care.

Because hospitals have to eat the costs associated with treatment provided under the EMTAL, the goal is to stabilize and transfer the patient. Gorski recalls his days as a surgery resident at a county hospital where they “used to joke about the Friday afternoon phone calls to transfer patients who had failed a wallet biopsy.”

Conservatives on Capitol Hill like to justify their position on principles of small government and personal autonomy. Such virtues come easily when you’re adequately insured and healthy.

[This post was published as an op-ed in The Columbus Dispatch on March 2, 2019.]

_________________________________

Jack D’Aurora writes for Considerthisbyjd.com

_________________________________________________

8
  Related Posts

Comments

  1. Debbie  March 6, 2019

    Fix it all. Get rid of the insurance lobbyists.

    reply
    • jdaurora@behallaw.com  March 9, 2019

      I’m certainly skeptical of the role lobbyists play in how things get done, but I think much of the the attack on the Affordable Care Act is brought by conservatives, who just don’t care that many people go uninsured.

      reply
  2. Jim Cowardin  March 7, 2019

    Catchy headline. But a lot of things cost lives: riding in or driving a car, drinking too much alcohol, riding a bike, flying in an airplane, a smoking habit…. But the futile attempt to provide affordable, effective, moderately priced healthcare fin this country is a scam. So Obamacare put a huge number of people on health insurance. What a boon for Health Care Companies! I had a friend who is an executive in that industry. He was terrified that Obama would get elected. He said his industry was in great trouble, if that came about. It did, and I have not heard from him regarding the hardships since. Those companies made oodles of money, a lot of which they gladly contributed to Democratic election campaigns. The employees at my charter school, however, did not fare as well. Neither eventually did the students. Once we became aware of the premiums they would have to pay and the deductibles they were facing, it was panic. Virtually, their whole take-home pay would be used up paying the premiums. Many of them commented to me that they would certainly not be going to the doctor, because the deductible would break them. So the board had no choice but to pay their premiums–a healthy raise. Not that they did not deserve it. There were no regrets spending the money on the staff, except that that was money we could not spend on the students. And money we could not use to give staff a raise that they could take home. The point is that we paid a lot of money for services that they would not use. You want the solution? Competition that begets innovation and lower prices. It is about time liberals get their collective heads out of their,,,,, the clouds and get just reasonable. People who work hard to be able to afford things like health care for their families will be screwed, because deadbeats, who refuse to work hard will be given benefits they do not deserve. These glamorous plans sound so good; they just won’t work. (That’s a period.)

    reply
    • jdaurora@behallaw.com  March 9, 2019

      I’m not going to be an apologist for the Affordable Care Act, but it was at least an attempt to remedy the problem. Tell me, please, what legislation the conservatives have passed to remedy the problem suffered by those who can’t afford insurance.

      reply
      • James Cowardin  March 9, 2019

        That is an absurd, mean statement. I don’t question your intent to help more people. You may accomplish getting more people insured, but you are certainly not necessarily getting them more services, when they cannot meet the deductible expense and how fair is it to make a 25-yr-Old single person pay for maternity coverage. The math never added up. The system would have crushed itself. Your socialism sounds great, but in the end, it does not work. VENEZULA and lots more examples. If free insurance for all is so great, why stop there? Let’s give everyone their own full time doctor and nurse. What? We can’t afford that? Neither can we afford the UNaffordable Health Care Act. It is time liberals enter reason-based discussions and quit the demonizing and scare tactics. It is unbecoming and it is not good for the country.

        reply
  3. James Cowardin  March 9, 2019

    I am not going to defend the R legislature. But they tried to pass a few weak things. But I disagree that it is possible or a good thing to have a one-payer insurance system. It would wreck our economy, because the government could not run it successfully. The places where it even appears to work are much different than the US population-wise. Why do Canadians come here to get treatment? Do you know anyone who goes to Canada for their health care? Social policies are fraudulent. But I do think you are sincere, you are just not correct.

    reply
    • jdaurora@behallaw.com  March 10, 2019

      I don’t know why you talk about single payer insurance, Venezuela (I don’t believe there’s such a place as VENEZULA) or socialism. I didn’t mention any of those things. My focus was on the mortality rates that follow when people are not insured, and I don’t see our government rising to the challenge. If we can put a man on the moon, we can figure this problem out. The challenge is getting beyond narrow thinking and getting creative. My statement was mean? Maybe just painfully reflective of the reality before us.

      reply
      • Jim Cowardin  March 10, 2019

        Many factors bear on the mortality rate. Picking one that conveniently matches your ideology is too easy. That for which you are advocating is socialism. A socialistic plan is not a solution. I do agree that technology can and hopefully will help improve healthcare for all. And free market competition is the best way to assist new discoveries and innovation. We’re the government to take charge the health care system would rot. It was a mean remark. Glib comments not withstanding. Sorry the computer could not handle my spelling. 🙂

        reply

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published and your last name is optional.