The national debate over health care can be summed up in a bill being debated in Sacramento.
Supporters of Senate Bill 810 say the legislation would be the only way to provide medical coverage for every Californian.
Opponents deride the measure as socialized medicine.
The California Universal Healthcare Act was introduced by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco. The bill would initiate single-payer universal health care for the state of California, Leno said. “What that means in short is Medicare for all,” he said.
Supporter Keith Ensminger, a Merced resident and owner of Kramer Translations, said the largest benefit of the legislation probably would be that it would include everyone. “Everybody would have insurance, regardless of their income and regardless of their position in life,” he said. “One of the bigger benefits for us is that nobody in the Central Valley would be required to remain poor for Medi-Cal. They would still have their insurance paid.”
A high percentage of Central Valley residents are on Medi-Cal.
There would be other positive effects from the bill, said Ensminger, who's a member of Health Care for All, a statewide organization that helped developed the bill. It would lower the cost of insurance for most people, everybody in the state would have a health insurance plan and it would aid people in having medical conditions treated early rather than waiting.
In addition, it would prevent medical bankruptcies, he said.
Dr. Bill Skeen, executive director of the California's chapter of Physicians for a National Health Program, said the organization supports the legislation because it's the only way of providing coverage for everyone and controlling the skyrocketing costs of the health care system. The organization advocates for a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program. “I think it would be a win-win situation for almost everyone,” he said.
Providers would also see gains from the plan, Skeen said. “One of them is (that) with a single-payer (system), there would be a simplified electronic billing system,” he said. That would help providers cut clerical costs.
However, Ensminger said, part of the bill that could draw criticism is that everyone would be a part of the same plan.
Organizations such as the California Chamber of Commerce and the Child and Family Protection Association strongly oppose the bill.
The CFPA refers to it as socialized medicine. “SB 810 would destroy our choices in health care and force us to pay for and exclusively use a government-controlled socialistic health care system — regardless of what the courts or Congress do with the Obamacare,” the organization said on its website.
Marti Fisher, a policy advocate with the California Chamber of Commerce, wasn't available for comment Monday. In a letter she sent to members of the Senate Health Committee on behalf of the chamber, she said the group opposes the bill because “it creates a new government-run, multibillion-dollar socialized health care system that would conflict with recently enacted federal health care reform and built from a yet-to-be-specified premium structure.”
However, Leno said the bill wouldn't conflict with federal health care law. He said the federal law would proceed while California considers the single-payer system.
In 2017, the federal law would let states apply for federal waivers, which would allow California to use federal dollars on health care in the state for a single-payer system, he said.
The waivers are intended to allow states to provide broader coverage without increasing the federal deficit. Leno said the single-payer system in California would cover everyone, while the federal law would leave about 3 million state residents without coverage. In California, there are about 12 million people without coverage at any given time, he added. “The single-payer would cover everyone and will reduce the cost and the growth in health care costs,” he said.
In the letter, Fisher of the Chamber of Commerce said the bill would “establish a premium commission to impose a premium for all employers, which is essentially a tax.”
The bill would use federal and state dollars — as well as employer and individual contributions — to fund the system.
The state spends about $200 billion on its health care system every year. Leno said the state would use the same money it now uses to pay for the single-payer system. “We will use that money much more efficiently,” he said.
The legislation is a two-year bill, Leno said, and its backers hope to have it on the governor's desk in the summer of 2012.
A similar bill was introduced in 2006 and in 2008 by former Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los Angeles.
The bill was vetoed twice by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
© 2011 McClatchy-Tribune Information Services
Truthout has licensed this content. It may not be reproduced by any other source and is not covered by our Creative Commons license.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy