John McCain and the ‘disaster’ of his health care plan

Last night, in a speech to supporters in which he effectively claimed the Republican nomination, John McCain immediately mocked Democrats on one of their strongest issues: “I will leave it to my [Democratic] opponent to propose returning to the failed, big-government mandates of the ’60s and ’70s to address problems such as the lack of health-care insurance for some Americans.”

It was an odd choice of attacks, given that McCain has no real intention of addressing the problems of the uninsured if elected.

From time to time, McCain has made encouraging noises on the issue. He’s supported re-importation of medicine from Canada; he’s teamed up with Ted Kennedy on a “patients’ bill of rights”; and he’ll occasionally criticize HMOs and big pharm.

But TNR’s Jonathan Cohn reports today on the healthcare plan McCain unveiled in October, and labels the policy a “disaster.”

McCain, of all people, should be sensitive to the way America’s health care system fails some of its most vulnerable citizens. He is a three-time survivor of melanoma, the potentially deadly skin cancer. Although he was last treated for cancer six years ago — and although he takes all the right precautions, dutifully donning sunscreen whenever he’s outside — he’s still at a higher-than-normal risk of getting cancer again.

This sort of history doesn’t seriously affect people who get their insurance from big-time employers. In any large organization of relatively random people — say, the employees of the federal government, of which McCain happens to be one — insurers know that most of the people will be healthy, which means premiums from those folks will be sufficient to cover the relatively few with serious medical problems.

But if McCain were, hypothetically, to shop for insurance on his own, he would discover that insurers were far less accommodating. Cancer, even one in remission, would qualify as one of those infamous “preexisting conditions.” The insurers might offer him an exorbitantly priced policy or exclude coverage of anything related to cancer. Or they simply might refuse him coverage outright.

Either way, the very last thing McCain should want is to expose even more people to this sort of scrutiny — since, almost certainly, it’d leave even more of them uninsured. But it’s entirely possible — some would say likely — that’s what McCain’s reforms would do.

Wait, it gets worse.

The main point of McCain’s proposal is to change tax policy to make it easier for people to have more insurance options outside their employer.

But there are good reasons to think that’s not how it will work out. Absent a substantial restructuring of the insurance industry, the people with preexisting medical conditions — including melanoma survivors — would still struggle to find decent coverage outside of the workplace. So it’s quite possible that only relatively healthy people would opt into the individual market. Once these more robust specimens fled employer groups, however, the cost of insurance for those remaining behind would go up — since insurance becomes more expensive without the contributions of relatively healthy people to offset the costs of those with high medical bills. And, as the cost of the employer insurance went up, even more people would start dropping it (or their companies might simply stop offering it). Appearing on ABC’s “This Week” recently, McCain told George Stephanopoulos that “I want the families to make the choice.” But, for Americans who are sick or poor or both, the McCain plan could mean fewer insurance choices than they have now — or no choice at all.

This is quite a contrast to the approach Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now touting. Although the Clinton and Obama plans differ in some crucial details, most notably whether to require that all legal residents carry insurance, both plans would allow people to obtain insurance regardless of preexisting medical conditions. They would do so by giving everybody access to a purchasing cooperative through which both private plans and a new public insurance program would be available. The plans would have to meet minimum standards and benefits, along the lines of what federal employees get. In other words, while Clinton and Obama would let people buy insurance on their own, they would take steps to make sure decent insurance was available to these people. McCain would do the former, but not the latter.

No matter which Dem gets the nomination, this is a fight to look forward to. If McCain support for an unpopular war doesn’t undermine his campaign, his useless healthcare policy will.

This news ties in nicely…you best be well off before you can afford to retire…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080305/ap_on_bi_ge/retiree_health_care

  • Maybe we should let every congresscritter shop for their own insurance, and tie their premiums to the average American’s premiums, scaled to their income level, so that every politician pays the same percentage of their income as the average American.

    I’ll bet we’d see some changes pretty quick.

  • There are arguments out there that every US citizen should get access to the same type of healthcare system that federal employees, including all elected federal representative, receive. Until that day occurs, how about making federal elected officials having to live with the same system the rest of have to deal with. Let John McCain see what it’s like to get insurance after three bouts of melanoma along with a spouse who had a stroke and a past issue with drug dependence or to watch his family’s coverage get dropped because the insurance companies feel like it. Maybe then Congress would take some action if they weren’t so insulated from the problem.

    McCain will not press for any type of positive change on healthcare if he does get to the White House and has to deal with a Democratic Congress. The Republican party is against fixing the problem and John is not the maverick that Tweety and Timmeh insist but is more like a weather vane showing us which way the Republican elites want things to go.

  • We made our choice. We coulda had universal healthcare but we got us a War instead. $3 Trillions worth.

  • In decades to come, we will look back on how hard it was to get Universal Healthcare and marvel at how dumb we are. Despite overwhemling evidence, the country is having to struggle to move forward and implement the obvious, efficient, and humane solution.

    What’s sad is how many people will buy McCain’s argument and vote to be poorer and sicker.

  • This is one reason why we must get past our “only my candidate” rhetoric and vote Democratic in November. Or, if you must, abstain from the presidential election, but vote for your Democratic nominees for Congress. Just don’t stay home unless you vote absentee.

  • We made our choice. We coulda had universal healthcare but we got us a War instead. $3 Trillions worth. -Dale

    Well, some people made that choice for us, but it’s a good thing we’re booting all the people responsible for that dumbass move to the curb.

    Oh, wait, we aren’t? Two of them are contenders for the Presidency? Up is down?

    I’m so confused.

  • Maybe we should let every congresscritter shop for their own insurance, and tie their premiums to the average American’s premiums, scaled to their income level, so that every politician pays the same percentage of their income as the average American.

    I’ll bet we’d see some changes pretty quick.

    – I second this motion

  • DragonScholar, It’s the same thing when goopers vote to defund schools in their districts. They vote against the schools which raise taxes, but also raise property values, so in essence, they are voting against themselves.

    Someone had mentioned that last night and it resonated. The had heard alot of seniors voting against schools – I guess it’s the whole If it doesn’t affect me NOW, heck on it. I wonder what many people who are now seniors feel about how they voted in the last 25 years vis a vis social security and goopers in general. Hindsight and all.

  • Let’s remember that in McCain’s case (but not his wife’s) that he has a perfectly good health care insurance alternative to his Congressional insurance – Medicare, for which he has qualified for quite a while, that covers preexisting conditions. He qualifies for that program with plenty of years to spare.

    Funny how those federal plans come through!

  • But if McCain were, hypothetically, to shop for insurance on his own, he would discover that insurers were far less accommodating.

    That’s the key to where the Republicans fail. Our current system is at its weakest with regards to purchasing individual coverage. There are certainly faults in insurance obtained through one’s employer, but in theory if these were the only problems they could be fixed. Besides, the bast majority of people with insurance through their employers have not experienced problems and many are unaware of the problems which do exist.

    The most obvious problem is in purchasing individual coverage, where unless someone is young, healthy, and probably willing to accept a big deductible it is hard for most people to find affordable coverage.

  • Threegoal said:
    Let’s remember that in McCain’s case (but not his wife’s) that he has a perfectly good health care insurance alternative to his Congressional insurance – Medicare, for which he has qualified for quite a while, that covers preexisting conditions. He qualifies for that program with plenty of years to spare.

    I wish someone in the corporate-controlled media would ask McCain:

    1) Since you’re so opposed to “socialized medicine”, why haven’t you rejected your government-funded health coverage and bought health insurance in the free market?

    2) You keep saying that medical care under government-funded health coverage is inferior to medical care under private coverage, so why are you inflicting ‘inferior’ health care on your family?

    Oh well, maybe he’ll be asked about it in the general election campaign. (Yeah, RIGHT!)

  • […] a lot of seniors voting against schools – I guess it’s the whole If it doesn’t affect me NOW, heck on it. — MsJoanne, @9

    I have seen this kind of short-sighted and me-first thinking (and voting) on both sides of the age spectrum, when I still used to attend the City Council meetings. The young people wanted more money for the schools; the retirees ones said “our children are all adult; what do we need schools for?” The young ones wanted money for the public swimming pool; the retirees said they wanted a golf course. The retirees wanted sidewalks in the suburbs; the young ones said they drove everywhere… And so the bickering went and nothing got done. Gaaagh.

  • Although there aren’t enough details to be sure, it appears that McCain has gone back to the position of eliminating the employer income tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance. Last year, McCain’s advisers said McCain’s plan would eliminate the current system’s tax benefits for both the employer (income tax deduction) and employee (exclusion from income of benefit of employer paid health insurance premiums). In answer to a question from a reporter, McCain said his plan would eliminate the employee benefit but would keep the employer benefit in place. I have looked all over McCain’s website and in several articles, but there doesn’t seem to be a clarification of his current position on the employer deduction.

    I think this is probably another flip flop for the ever growing list of flip flops.

  • neither side has this issue right. anyone in health care with half a brain knows that universal health care won’t work in America. people won’t tolerate it. even people that don’t work and live on welfare or disability feel totally entitled.

    bottom line is, with universal health care you are going to need supplemental insurance to get ANYTHING done. many practices aren’t accepting medicaid at all and limiting their medicare patients because reimbursements are so low.

    great way to increase costs. great thing to take a political stand on. bad way to help people.

  • Comments are closed.