Saturday, October 24, 2009

CALL CONGRESSMAN COSTA


Congressman Jim Costa (D-Fresno/Bakersfield) is one of our local representatives who thinks the public option is a bad idea because of budgetary considerations. Fair enough. Here's the real problem: Costs are expected to grow significantly without change that brings real competition. The projected costs without change or real competition - which the public option provides - should be the real issue.

PROJECTED COSTS: The Department of Health and Human Services is clear that by 2018 "national health spending is expected to reach $4.4 trillion and comprise just over one-fifth (20.3 percent) of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)" (updates here and here).


Worse, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, by 2025 health care is expected to consume 25 cents of every dollar our nation spends, and is expected to jump to 37 cents in 2050 and 49 cents in 2082! That means by 2082 as a nation we will spend almost 50 cents of every dollar we have on health care. Currently we are only spending about 17 cents of every dollar we have on health care (still not good when compared to other nations, and considering we get less bang for our buck).

ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS: Of the total amount spent on private health care in America, according to a 2003 New England Journal of Medicine study, over 30% went to cover administrative costs in the private sector. This, it would appear, includes marketing, profits, and commissions. Medicare administrative costs run about 2% of expenditures.

CALL COSTA: Looking at the budget today without looking at our economic costs tomorrow is no way to approach the issue. Simply saying no, and accepting the insurance industry's status quo is not acceptable. Call Congressman Jim Costa (CA-20) at 202-225-3341 (DC Office), 661-869-1620 (Bakersfield), and 559-495-1620 (Fresno) to let him know that we need the public option.

Don't bother with Congressman Kevin McCarthy. If you saw his health care town hall-political rally you know he's a lost cause.

- Mark

P.S. For another Private Insurance vs. Medicare administrative costs estimate, which suggests 17% (Private) versus 5% (Medicare) click here. I haven't looked at this closely, but it seems reasonable at first glance.

No comments: