We know healthcare matters to us but Washington is in a rut when it comes to health care and as consumers we must focus on what we insist upon to improve healthcare in the US, starting with out of pocket maximums, those amounts you and I must pay before our health insurance plans pay 100 percent of expenses of covered services.
In the year 2000, a Gallup poll concluded that after education and the economy health care came in as the THIRD most important issue to American voters.
"Health care and Medicare are two very important issues to the American public this year. A strong majority of Americans say that health care generally and Medicare more specifically are important issues influencing their vote for president." (Wendy W. Simmons, 9/28/2000, http://www.gallup.com/poll/2503/health-care-important-issue-year.aspx).
And in May 2015--Healthcare policy came in as the THIRD most important issue to American voters, (Jeffrey M. Jones, 5/15/2015, http://www.gallup.com/poll/183164/economy-trumps-foreign-affairs-key-2016-election-issue.aspx), (though Mr. Jones spends not a single word on the survey results about healthcare choosing instead to focus on "international matters.")
But there are differences between 2000 and 2016 that have changed the nature of consumer concerns. In 2000, Gallup reported that "Most Americans want government to take active role in dealing with issue," whereas in 2016 a category never addressed by Gallup in 2000, "The way government operates in Washington," takes second place for election year 2016.
For consumers, does our mistrust of government change the conclusions of 2000 that government should take an active role in dealing with the issue? The answer sadly is that government MUST play a role in healthcare reform and that Obamacare whether repealed or left in place worsens our dependence on government to partner with the people it represents to improve healthcare in the US even as government has shown over these last 16 years that it's not trustworthy to improve the US healthcare system.
So, should we vote the "repeal" candidate or the third-term of Obama candidate front-runners? Likely it doesn't matter until the core issue of a rogue government that fails to respond to its citizens is addressed. When it comes to healthcare our representatives in government are NOT doing a good job.
What's your emergency fund? A quick and easy immediate action should be an adjustment to the out-of-pocket maximums for which an individual can be held responsible each year.
Today, Americans WITH health insurance must have an emergency fund of $6,850 for an individual and $13,700 for a family Per Year at a MINIMUM in their emergency fund in case they need medical care or services.
This number is too high. The out-of-pocket maximum must be reduced and increases must be hinged to the same number (Consumer Price Index) used by the government to determine increases in Social Security payments for the COLA. This year, social security recipients received a 0 increase yet our out-of-pocket maximums went up.
The out-of-pocket maximum is a simple product of health insurers wanting to push us into Health Savings Accounts, (originally known as healthy/wealthy accounts) where their administrative work is reduced, they give people a small break on premiums and the health insurers pay out less on claims.
Disguising Health Savings Accounts as a way to "save" pre-tax dollars is ridiculous for most Americans facing illness because the "savings" of pre-tax dollars will come nowhere near paying for an illness event EVEN IF Americans accumulate the "savings" year over year which are $3,350 for an individual per year and $6,650 per year for a family. You need look no further than the high deductibles attached to these accounts, the cost of even the most basic medical services and the fact that those accumulated "savings" are spent first in the event of illness to know this.
So let's start there candidates and government: Will you reduce the out-of-pocket maximum paid by consumers and make an increase in that amount dependent on the same index used to determine whether those on Social Security will get a COLA (which they did not receive this year) and further provide that health insurance companies SHALL NOT include such a reduction in out-of-pocket expenses as an excuse to raise premiums?
