Though there has been plenty of reporting about the Presidential candidates' health reform plans, how much do we really understand about what the John McCain or Barack Obama plans will mean for individuals and families? Making it clear is a mantle taken up by Columbia Journalism Review reporter Trudy Lieberman, who has begun a series looking at real people and the candidates' plans:
So far, mainstream media coverage of health care during the campaign has been characterized by stenographic reporting—simply transcribing what the candidates say, buzz words and all. Blogosphere coverage has trended the opposite direction—way too much wonk talk, angels dancing on the head of a pin-type stuff.
What have been missing are the people stories. Exactly how will all these economic and political calculations and pronouncements affect those who struggle daily to fill their prescriptions, find a competent doctor, or pay their medical bills? These are the people whose stories the media have yet to tell.
Lieberman's first stop was Helena, Arkansas, where she noted "how little [the residents] knew about the coming health care battle being waged in their name." She concludes that by telling the personal stories of how these policy decisions will affect people "it will not only be more interesting, but it will help people evaluate the ad messages, the special interest spiels, the propaganda, and the demagoguery that will surely come."
In her second piece she details how Helena's head jailer and his diabetic son would fare under the Obama and McCain plans. Her analysis:
Neither father nor son would fare well under McCain’s proposals. Bell the elder would have to pay taxes on the value of his health insurance benefits. Economists argue that removing the tax exclusion for employer-provided benefits is a move toward equity, since the exclusion now favors highly paid people who get rich benefits. Equity or not, Bell would have to find the money to pay the extra taxes on an income that hardly covers the essentials. In exchange, he would get a $2500 tax credit to buy his own coverage, as an incentive to leave the county’s health plan.
...
Bell the younger would have the same problem. Even with the $2500 tax credit and additional federal subsidies, most likely he would still be uninsured. His diabetes makes him uninsurable. McCain proposes putting people like him in a special high risk pool for the sickest of the sick, where premiums would be sky-high and benefits may be limited. Without an income to pay the premiums required by the high risk pool, or very generous subsidies, it’s hard to see how this would be much of an option. Bottom line: James Bell IV would still have troubled getting needed care.
And under the Obama plan:
Neither father nor son would be required to buy insurance. The elder Bell could keep his coverage, which will probably get more expensive. Although Obama has promised that he would lower the cost of premiums by $2500 for the typical family, health analysts dispute whether this is achievable. Obama talks of a public plan option: Medicare-like coverage that people could choose instead of buying from commercial carriers. Whether this option will be cheaper depends on who provides the coverage.
If the government offers the benefits, as it does for Medicare, it’s possible that Bell’s premiums and other out-of-pocket expenses could be lower. There would also be a uniform comprehensive benefit package. If private insurers, with their high marketing and administrative costs, offer the benefits, then it’s not clear which option would be preferable. Too much is unknown, and, as the Democratic Party’s platform notes, all this will be thrashed out in the legislative process anyway.
Comments