Health Care Campaign Unveiled
by Christine Stuart | January 13, 2009 7:53 AM
Posted to Health Care
| State Capitol
(Updated 4:02 p.m.)Despite a more than $6 billion state budget deficit, health care advocates believe this could be the year that Connecticut reforms its health care system.
At 9 a.m. today the Universal Health Care Foundation unveiled it’s SustiNet proposal, which creates a massive health insurance pool by combining the pool of state employees and retirees with people now covered under state assistance programs.
Juan Figueroa, president of the Universal Health Care Foundation, said the plan uses the purchasing power of the state to create a pool and is similar to plans being discussed at the federal level.
“It’s a public plan designed to compete in private marketplace,” Figueroa said during a conference call this afternoon.
The plan, if passed by the legislature, will begin in 2011 and will be rolled out over five years.
If implemented over its five-year timeline, SustiNet would save households and businesses a combined total of $1.75 billion in 2014, Figueroa said. It also assumes what he called a “conservative” $800 million in federal Medicaid funds.
He said the upfront costs for the first two years of the plan are minimal although he was unable to put a number on it. Two years ago an Office of Fiscal Analysis report on the cost of the organization’s single-payer type plan, ultimately killed the proposal.
Figueroa said this plan is different than the one proposed two years ago in that it addresses the delivery of health care by making it more efficient, instead of simply dealing with the financing of the plan.
The new plan is designed to offer a health care coverage option, stimulate competition and address the root cause of the health system’s problems, foundation officials said.
Keith Stover, a lobbyist with Robinson and Cole who represents insurance companies, said every proposal that gets put on the table creates an opportunity to have a conversation about this critical issue. He said it’s the insurance industry’s hope “we’re going to get somewhere this year.” However, he said the industry won’t support a plan that includes “the state now getting into the business and competing with the insurance industry.”
“At some point we have to transition from the philosophical to the practical,” Stover said Tuesday afternoon in the lobby of the Legislative Office Building.
How is it different than the Massachusetts plan?
Unlike Massachusetts there are no individual mandates to purchase insurance in the foundation’s proposal. However, individuals will be signed up for the plan if they show up at the emergency room without health insurance, Figueroa said.
According to the plan, employers offering coverage are encouraged to continue to do so by two factors. First, even if federal health care reform is enacted, powerful federal tax incentives are likely to remain in place favoring employer payment of health insurance premiums. Second, medium-sized and large employers that do not cover their workers are required by SustiNet to make modest “shared responsibility” payments to help cover the cost of their employees’ health care. This is expected to lessen the extent to which firms shed costs by dropping coverage.
More than 500 people from across the state are expected to gather tonight at Union Station in Hartford to hear the details of a sweeping new plan.
Comments (6)
Posted by: lets see | January 13, 2009 9:57 AM
Universal health care has been tried by another state of the union. It has turned up to be a failed policy. Reason for the failure cost for the gov't. It was not feasable for it to be run by the state. CT would be the third state trying this failed policy.
Even our president elect said for the econonomy in the whole it is not feasable for his policy of change to happen.
Our state is in the whole. The only winner is the insurance companies not paying or providing services or trying to find doctors who will not accept it.
This policy in place would see our health professionals move to other states or see it close their doors. Leaving our health care at risk.
I know from fighting insurance companies for 2 years paying services that they thought were elective surgery. The insurance companies just drag their feet in paying for services that were rendered. Thinking that the cleint would give up.
Posted by: City Hall Watch | January 13, 2009 3:49 PM
How did Juan Figueroa ever get to be president of anything? How in the world can you propose a massive program like this, in a year and economy like this, and have no idea as to start up costs which are likely in the tens of millions of dollars at the very least? And where is the personal responsibility part?
Posted by: lets see | January 13, 2009 5:28 PM
It does not mandate that undocumented workers to sign up. They are able to obain these service. They get free emergency health care by the state and the federal gov't. This is creating havic on our state budget.
Hospitals and insurance companies are forcing people to obtain this dopey insurance. Most of uninsured rather stay uninsured. Not forced into a policy they do not want. I have several friends that are not insured. They would rather stay that way then pay into the system saving them money that they do not have.
Biggest supportors of the health care is At&t and Walmart. They rather not pay for insurance for thier employees. I know this by having my family members and myself working for these companies.
Posted by: Kerri | January 13, 2009 8:45 PM
I'm curious if the two previous comments are from people who even bothered to read the proposal. It's not perfect, but it's quite different from what MA is doing. As for personal responsibility, caring for the health and lives of other human beings is the clearest demonstration of personal responsibility that I can think of.
Posted by: LS3 | January 14, 2009 12:06 AM
Hospitals can't not deny a person care. They are obligated to treat and service the patient.From being in the ems field I had to treated people. I was also one without healthcare one point and time. With the health field dodging the husky and other state supplemented insurances. Their is so much red tape. Doctors won't accept it. The state want to save patients money put a cap on lawsuits. Doctor will just end up paying for the liability insurance and reaping no profits. Take look in NJ practices are closing because of the insurance that they have to pay.
Posted by: City Hall Watch | January 14, 2009 9:39 AM
Kerri:
We spend a lot of my tax dollars caring for other people. I spend a lot of my personal dollars doing the same thing on a one on one basis. I'm talking about where is the personal responsibility of the people who don't have insurance, who won't get insurance and who have no plans to pay for insurance even if this plan is put in place. And where is the money going to come from? What state programs would you recommend cutting in order to fund it? Where are the start up funds and how much is needed? These basic questions remain unanswered.