Cranley Proposes Ambitious Health Care Plan

“CincyCare” won’t be taken to council until after election

BY MICHAEL D. ALTMAN | October 10, 2007

 

City Councilman John Cranley has announced an ambitious health-care plan for the working poor.  The plan, which he won’t formally propose until after the Nov. 6 election, would use city funding to help provide health care for workers at a cheaper rate for both employees and business owners.

 

Cranley’s proposal — called “CincyCare” — would have premiums of approximately $1,500 per year per person, split into thirds among the city, an employer and an employee. That would cost approximately $10 per week for each employee, matched by the same amount for employers and the city.  CincyCare would provide unlimited access to Cincinnati’s six health care centers and insurance for an additional $25,000 of health care.

 

“The studies show that $25,000 a year covers 98 percent of all health care claims,” Cranley says. “Basically the model is that you have this huge gap of people between the ages 18-65 who are working and they don’t have high-quality — or any — care. And what we’re finding is that, by focusing on primary care and preventive care, we can focus on a lot of problems before they get serious, help a lot more people and actually deliver health care to people in a more effective way than what is currently out there.”

 

Read full article here:

http://citybeat.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A142227

premiums of 1500 a year? I'm no consultant, but that ain't going to buy much.

 

(oh wait, I am a consultant, that isn't going to buy much)

Well, poop,  :wave: my first post here may get me noosed and hanged........ :wtf:

 

Mr. Cranley's CincyCare is Hillary style socialized medicine.

We know it doesn't work -- Canadians go elsewhere -- Cubans go elsewhere --  and the latest story was on Brits who are using super glue to reset crowns and pliers to pull their own teeth because the government dentists are so bad and care is non-existent.

 

As much as I admit that the present health care costs are through the roof and much needs to be done, I disagree that we should hand our health care dollars and decisions over to the government.

 

Mr. Cranley has obviously left some important info. for after Nov 6....such as - Who will be paying for this plan?? 

Answer, of course, is US/We are - the productive/the workers/the already overburdened due to social entitlement programs - taxpayers.

 

 

Ok then....

 

Mr. Cranley has obviously left some important info. for after Nov 6....such as - Who will be paying for this plan?? 

 

Very good question.  I also wonder if city government needs to be involved in this.  It seems way too big.

Well, poop,  :wave: my first post here may get me noosed and hanged........ :wtf:

 

Mr. Cranley's CincyCare is Hillary style socialized medicine.

We know it doesn't work -- Canadians go elsewhere -- Cubans go elsewhere --  and the latest story was on Brits who are using super glue to reset crowns and pliers to pull their own teeth because the government dentists are so bad and care is non-existent.

 

As much as I admit that the present health care costs are through the roof and much needs to be done, I disagree that we should hand our health care dollars and decisions over to the government.

 

Mr. Cranley has obviously left some important info. for after Nov 6....such as - Who will be paying for this plan?? 

Answer, of course, is US/We are - the productive/the workers/the already overburdened due to social entitlement programs - taxpayers.

 

 

Ok then....

 

 

Cubans spend about 5% of what americans do and live about three months less on average

Canadians spend about 60% of what americans do and live about two years more on average

 

we spend the most on healthcare in the world and are 45th in life expectancy and 41st for infant mortality, just edging out Croatia.

 

I look forward to learning more about the plan. To the extent that it would actually provide primary care for those who would otherwise go the ER for everything, it would actually save money. And if the Health Dept can generate revenue, that would offset costs.

 

This is about providing an affordable minimum of care for those who would otherwise not be able to access the system except through the ER. It's not socialized medicine, it's the city participating in the market.

 

 

^I'm curious what exactly Pollyana means by socialized medicine?  Because the words "managed care" which is the term for the current insurance & pharmaceutical company directed system that we have in the United States, and that sounds incredibly socialistic to me.  But I doubt you thought much about the economic content of the terms you were using anyway.

 

Is CincyCare going to set prices, or prevent people from traveling to other states to pay cash for their health care if they want?  No.  Having worked both private business and the government, I've felt that large corporations tend to act in the same ways, regardless of whether they are public or private.  They are all run by people, some competent, some less so.  But I suppose that is beside the point.  So if you are terribly concerned with using capitalistic language, imagine this as a mutual fund where you can buy shares in medicines and medical expertise that will accrue more and more value in the future.  And you're buying in a group because it makes it cheaper for everyone in the group rather than acting individually, so you can buy more possible future care (that's clunky phrase... let's call it insurance) as well as better possible future care than you could on your own.  And this is all being sponsored by the city government, a corporation you trust to provide clean water, take away waste, and other valuable health-related services. 

 

I'm tired of writing.  You can find this all online anyway.  Just google "Stalin's Five Year Plan".  The part of health care starts on page 27.

Well, poop,  :wave: my first post here may get me noosed and hanged........ :wtf:

 

Its pope asshat.

 

Mr. Cranley's CincyCare is Hillary style socialized medicine.

We know it doesn't work -- Canadians go elsewhere -- Cubans go elsewhere --  and the latest story was on Brits who are using super glue to reset crowns and pliers to pull their own teeth because the government dentists are so bad and care is non-existent.

 

1) Cubans Go elsewhere? Where are they going?

2) What does british dentistry have to do with this discussion that revolves around medical insurance

3) I love how quick the US politcos are so quick to highlight some of the ills that do exist in the larger socialized systems (i.e. Canada to our north). Problems do exist, but nothing to the scale that exists in the US. Its not like people are dying while waiting for a necessary procedure. At least ALL canadians have access to healthcare and a doctor.

 

Mr. Cranley has obviously left some important info. for after Nov 6....such as - Who will be paying for this plan?? 

Answer, of course, is US/We are - the productive/the workers/the already overburdened due to social entitlement programs - taxpayers.

 

More important is how much your employer is picking up for you insurance. Its an alarming trend, how much a) employers are offering insurance, and b) how much they are shifting the financial burden to the consumer.

Its pope asshat.

 

Hi Pope Asshat, what a funny name  8-)

 

but, I really did mean poop because these topics can be so incendiary, whether you mean for them to be or not.

 

1) Cubans Go elsewhere? Where are they going?

2) What does british dentistry have to do with this discussion that revolves around medical insurance

3) I love how quick the US politcos are so quick to highlight some of the ills that do exist in the larger socialized systems (i.e. Canada to our north)

 

It is very important to look at other places where nationalized/socialized medicine has been implemented and look at how well it works or in the cases mentioned does not work.

 

thomasbw,

It does not matter how much less Cubans or Canadians or Brits spend if they cannot get everyday care that we take for granted (ex. wellness checkups, MRI's, cancer treatments, etc)

 

More important is how much your employer is picking up for you insurance. Its an alarming trend, how much a) employers are offering insurance, and b) how much they are shifting the financial burden to the consumer.

 

Not much in my case. My employer is moving more and more toward the consumer driven health care plans. It is a pain in the beginning but I do like making my own choices and decisions about my health spending account $$.

 

^I'm curious what exactly Pollyana means by socialized medicine?

Hi LK, what I mean and meant by Socialized medicine is any government run plan. The plan that Hillary is proposing and the Democrats are trying to push with all the additional adult coverage and coverage for those just under $100,000 a year (SCHIP)  - that is what I am meaning.

 

 

comparing the medical system of the richest country in the world to a third world country probably isn't the best comparison, but apparently the canadians and residents forty three other countries who live longer and pay less than we do are getting the treatments they need

baseball analogy, we have a payroll of the Yankees and the W-L record of the Reds

apparently the canadians and residents forty three other countries who live longer and pay less than we do are getting the treatments they need

 

I have to disagree from personal knowledge...

 

Not through their own country and their own countries nationalized health plans.

 

The Clintons Canadian pals came here for treatment.

Castro went elsewhere for treatment

The Brits are pulling their own teeth with pliers or traveling to other places for treatment

 

and I have personal friends and acquaintances  who have gone elsewhere and paid out of pocket to get health care we take for granted as normal and common treatment.

 

 

 

As a former patient of the Cincinnati Health Clinics, I really don't see anyone who has a choice using them because of the long wait. 

 

As it is now, anyone can use the Health Clinic for $5 co-pay if you claim you have low income.  They want you to bring in a check stub, but seems like they don't really check that hard.

 

The $25,000 coverage is not enough.  If a person has a home, and has major illness or surgery, they could still lose their home under Cranley's proposal.  It must be tied to a catastrophic illness plan for it to have meaning.

 

I would rather have a State-wide or Country-wide optional minimal cost insurance.

Hi LK, what I mean and meant by Socialized medicine is any government run plan. The plan that Hillary is proposing and the Democrats are trying to push with all the additional adult coverage and coverage for those just under $100,000 a year (SCHIP)  - that is what I am meaning.

 

This is the type of thinking I don't understand.  Nothing is still a government plan.  Someone in authority is making the choice to stay out of health care.  So the only objective factors are cost.  And in many cases it is more cost-effective for the government to involve itself in certain markets.  And active government regulation of all markets allows for the information necessary for an individual to make good economic decisions.

apparently the canadians and residents forty three other countries who live longer and pay less than we do are getting the treatments they need

 

I have to disagree from personal knowledge...

 

Not through their own country and their own countries nationalized health plans.

 

The Clintons Canadian pals came here for treatment.

Castro went elsewhere for treatment

The Brits are pulling their own teeth with pliers or traveling to other places for treatment

 

and I have personal friends and acquaintances who have gone elsewhere and paid out of pocket to get health care we take for granted as normal and common treatment.

 

 

 

 

i have only this question to ask, why do we ,the country that pays the most for healthcare in the entire world, have the 45th highest life expectancy? should we not be one or two or even in the top ten?

 

canada might not be perfect, but when I am 76, you bet I want that extra 18 months of life.

yeah, the anecdotal evidence (life expectancy, infant mortality, etc) sure doesn't make our system look world class. (especially considering how much other countries spend on healthcare.

 

20% of GDP? Here we come by 2015!

Pollyanna - you can take that tone with your loved ones, but you will not take it with the Admins or Mods of this forum. Enjoy your week off; if it happens again, you're gone for good. What kind of idiot signs up on a forum to participate in one isolated thread and then proceeds to insult a Mod right off the bat? I doubt you'll be missed.

apparently the canadians and residents forty three other countries who live longer and pay less than we do are getting the treatments they need

 

I have to disagree from personal knowledge...

 

Not through their own country and their own countries nationalized health plans.

 

The Clintons Canadian pals came here for treatment.

Castro went elsewhere for treatment

The Brits are pulling their own teeth with pliers or traveling to other places for treatment

 

and I have personal friends and acquaintances  who have gone elsewhere and paid out of pocket to get health care we take for granted as normal and common treatment.

 

 

 

 

i have only this question to ask, why do we ,the country that pays the most for healthcare in the entire world, have the 45th highest life expectancy? should we not be one or two or even in the top ten?

 

canada might not be perfect, but when I am 76, you bet I want that extra 18 months of life.

 

-Fast food

-Accessible and affordable junk food

-Car-centric transportation systems

-Suburbs

-More work, less sleep

-High-fructose corn syrup

-TV

-Etc.

You have to understand--other countries are riding our coattals when it comes to medical breakthroughs. Its misleading to bring up life expectancy and infant mortality when there's so many other factors involved. Haynes brings up some good points about how our culture effects our health. I'm a fan of universal healthcare (actually my ideal system would be a compromise of that and what we have now) but you have to understand there are both advantages and disadvantages. What bothers me most is people who's argument is "why should I pay for YOUR healthcare"... well..you're already doing that with insurance premiums. The money you pay into it contributes to someone's 100k + cancer treatment.

^seriously. At my company I am clearly subsidizing everyone's health insurance costs (no claims in 2 yrs)

 

However, maybe it is true that US based research does produce a lot of the homeruns in new drug treatments and other tools, is it a fair trade to say "we rock the R&D's world's socks, but at the cost of our life expectancy and spiraling health costs"? (not necessary directed at you David, just food for thought)

City to vote on insurance plan

2,000 uninsured workers could get health coverage

 

City Council will vote today on a program to provide basic health care to up to 2,000 uninsured workers through city health centers.  Today's vote on the CincyCare pilot program comes as new data show a shaky economy is putting an increasing burden on consumers and health-care providers.

 

The amount of uncompensated care provided by Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky hospitals more than doubled from 2003 to 2007, jumping from $119 million to $239 million, according to a report released Tuesday by the Greater Cincinnati Health Council.  Hamilton County hospitals provided $141.9 million of that care last year, the report showed.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20081015/NEWS0108/810150316/1169/NEWS

CincyCare health plan filling up quickly

 

Petermann Ltd. and the Society of St. Vincent De Paul are among 30 companies requesting entry in CincyCare, a pilot health-care program through which the city of Cincinnati hopes to cover the working poor.

 

The two-year program was created by a $1.2 million grant, awarded by Cincinnati City Council in October. Employer sign-ups for the program began Monday morning. Councilman John Cranley said companies signed up so far could fill more than 25 percent of the 2,000 available slots. The companies requesting coverage so far could fill more than 665 of those available slots.

 

Read full article here:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/12/01/daily13.html