The economic crisis: an investment opportunity

Posted 1/02/2009 06:00:00 AM

The Health Security Act is a safe investment the state needs to make

By Jane Blume

We are facing the greatest economic crisis since the depression. Unemployment is increasing, health costs are rising, families are financially strapped, and in 2009 our state Legislature must deal with expanding costs along with a huge deficit of hundreds of millions of dollars.

A key factor in the financial problems faced by the Big Three automakers and other businesses is the ever-rising cost of health care. These expenses are also impacting our state budget, which is confronted with increasing health-care expenditures for Medicaid programs and state and local government employees and retirees. These rising costs are putting pressure, once again, on our state lawmakers to decide how to maintain a healthy population with fewer financial resources, while at the same time allocating sufficient funds for education and other state obligations.

Over the years, millions of New Mexico taxpayer dollars have been spent to try to reduce the number of uninsured; yet, not only are large numbers of residents still not covered, but those who have coverage are feeling the pinch as well.

New Mexico businesses, large and small, are seriously impacted. The more premiums rise, the less revenue there is to invest in economic growth and jobs, and the harder it is to cover the health-care needs of employees. Current policies that rely on our private insurance system have not only clearly failed, but are a festering sore in our sick economy.

Now more than ever, New Mexico needs to invest in a real universal health-care solution that will not only guarantee health coverage and provide health security, but will also reduce rising health-care costs.

The clock is ticking, and the time has come for the Legislature to step up to the plate and pass the Health Security Act.

It would reduce health-care costs

Under the act, New Mexico will be able to create its own cooperative health insurance plan with freedom of choice of doctor and comprehensive services. Most New Mexicans would be covered under this one plan, simplifying what has become an enormously complex administrative system for providers.

In essence, the establishment of such a plan shifts the role of our private insurance to a supplemental one, just as Medicare did when it was created. In a state with a small population and limited resources, that makes a lot of economic sense.

And economic sense is precisely what was demonstrated in the final report of a 2007 study that was commissioned by Gov. Richardson: namely, that the health security proposal is the only plan that reduces health-care costs up to $200 million in the first year of operation. An earlier study conducted in New Mexico in 1994 came to the same conclusion: Covering all or most state residents in one health risk pool saves an enormous amount of money over time.

In addition to saving money and ensuring comprehensive health coverage for New Mexicans, passage of the Health Security Act decreases pressures on the state’s general fund and frees up dollars that can be spent on education, the environment and economic development.

Given these volatile economic times, the Health Security Act is a safe investment. Once it is passed, the first year focuses on the cost and affordability of the plan. The Legislative Finance Committee (whose meetings are open to the public) would be in charge of providing a cost and financing analysis that must be voted on at a subsequent session and approved by the governor. The two-year development phase of the plan, again with public input, will only go forward should the plan prove to be affordable. Thus, the plan’s cooperative governance structure would only be set up after the financing is approved.

The careful process outlined in the Health Security Act means that the first year would only require that the Legislature pay for the cost analysis.

It has major public support

Not only is the Health Security Act a safe and vitally needed investment, but it also is the only proposal that has major public support. Some 139 diverse organizations around the state, as well as 30 cities and counties, have endorsed it. This groundswell of support comes with the recognition that this well-thought-out plan was created by New Mexicans for New Mexicans and developed over years of consulting with thousands of diverse people and groups throughout our state.

Given the cost savings, the simplification of a complex system, the guaranteed health coverage, the economic benefits, the small investment required and the enormous public support to take this important step, there is really no excuse to wait any longer. I urge readers to learn more about the Health Security Act by visiting our Web site, nmhealthsecurity.org, or by calling us at (505) 897-1803.

For the Health Security Act to become a reality, it’s important for everyone to contact their legislators and ask them to vote for it.

Blume is the owner and principal of the Albuquerque-based public relations firm Desert Sky Communications. She has been the media-relations consultant to the Health Security for New Mexicans Campaign since 1998.

Labels: , ,

3 Comments:

At 8:15 AM, January 02, 2009, Blogger TnT said...

During the 2008 regular session, Governor Richardson and the insurance companies supported the Health Solutions Act (HB 62, sponsored by Heaton). The Health Security Act, HB 214, was sponsored by Gonzales. If you want to study the differences, go to the NM legislature site.

But be aware that there are two proposals, and the names are so similar as to be confusing.

 
At 10:17 AM, January 02, 2009, Blogger Joseph Cummins said...

This article ought to cause all who believe in FREEDOM to vomit.

When I visited the www sites listed in this article and read available data I was struck by the consistent (by design) ambiguities. Although I could not find a specific reference – it's a well known part of any so-called state operated health plan that everyone will be FORCED to participate.

Managed Health Care schemes were initiated in the mid-70's as being the way to save the system from financial chaos. Yet, after all these years why haven't the managers and planners solved the situation instead of creating the current mess? Will more of their incompetent managing and planning solve the problems they created? Isn’t this whole plan merely another disguised bailout?

Why do so-called public servants receive superior health care at the taxpayer’s expense? The health of the taxpayer can be solved by making public servants pay their fair share instead of wanting the private sector to bail them out with more municipal debt bonds.

When reading through the www sites posted in this article I could not find a definition for "preventive health care". This subject will end-up being a new Gestapo agency that busts into homes looking for bad (unapproved) food being eaten, or bad (unapproved) life-styles.

This whole concept is just plain rotten for it places individual personal responsibility in the hands of managers, planners and legislators, all of which are actually tyrannical rulers. Clearly, those promoting this agenda want something, such as the power to tell you how to live/behave along with your money. Likewise, the promoters of this health plan believe the individual is stupid or they would not have the audacity to present such a colossal nightmare.

This plan has the ring of being free of charge, but we all know there is nothing free. In fact a small portion of this plan states that fees will be based upon income level. So, the more you make the more you pay.

Near the end of this article it states: "It has major public support -- Not only is the Health Security Act a safe and vitally needed investment, but it also is the only proposal that has major public support. Some 139 diverse organizations around the state, as well as 30 cities and counties, have endorsed it." Don't be fooled by the carefully worded rhetoric. Read again and notice that the only "public" mentioned are more politicians and govt agencies and not the private person.

In 1755 Franklin wrote: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 
At 10:01 PM, February 12, 2009, Blogger Peri said...

Joseph, for better or worse the reason that most "universal"-type health plans require mandatory participation is pure math, no Gestapo power grab. When the bean counters crunch the numbers, the best way to keep premiums low is to maximize the size of the pool, which spreads risk more broadly--and this is best achieved by mandatory participation. Nonmandatory participation tends to result in smaller, sicker groups, forcing costs up. Lots of studies have demonstrated this: The acceptable price points are achieved only by mandatory participation.

This is also why public servants tend to get relatively good benefits: it has nothing to do with self-interest or self-dealing, but that state governments have buying power and broad, lower-risk pools due to having so many employees.

I make these points just to help clarify some general points; I haven't actually studied enough of the details of the Health Security Act to know if I'm actually in favor of it or not. (I keep meaning to!) But Joseph's fascist fear-mongering really begged for a reality check!

Peri Pakroo

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Published comments have been deemed by Heath Haussamen to be in compliance with this site’s comments policy. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Heath Haussamen or this site. If you know of a person who is abusing this site’s comments system by impersonating someone else or in other ways, please report it by clicking here.