empire health insurance
Independent Women's Forum - Research Areas > Health Care Reform
- The Grass is Always Greener...
Reports out of Canada are that all is not well for the public healthcare system in that country. More and more private clinics are popping up allowing "queue-jumpers" to pay for and receive services and tests immediately, instead of waiting for their turn in the public system. And of course, rather than recognize there are failures in a government run healthcare system that has led to the increase in private clinics, critics of the private facilities blame THEM for the often lengthy waits experienced in the public system. Click here to read this unbelievable article.
- Family Unfriendly Family and Medical Leave
- I'll Second That
From Grace Marie Turner via the Wall Street Journal:
The slide toward a government-dominated, taxpayer-supported health sector will continue unless the 45.7 million Americans who don't have insurance now are given more opportunities to buy private coverage.
States could help by lightening their regulatory burdens to encourage greater competition for more attractive and affordable coverage. The federal government needs to do its part by updating today's tax policies to better fit a mobile, 21st-century economy.
More here.
- Domestic Disturbance
President Bill Clinton's first major legislative accomplishment - at least from his perspective - was passing the Family and Medical Leave Act. And though presidential hopeful Sen. Obama promises he is a new kind of candidate, ready to make a fresh break with the past, his domestic policy agenda largely begins where President Clinton's left off. This would include a dramatic expansion of workplace regulations.
At a speech in New Mexico this week, for instance, Sen. Obama lamented how "unfair" the workplace is. From women earning less than men to minimum-wage workers struggling to meet rising food and energy costs, Obama believes injustice in America is running rampant. He championed a litany of proposals he claims will address such inequities, including a massive expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The changes he envisions aren't minor.
Currently, only businesses with more than 50 employees are affected by FMLA. Obama wants to drag all businesses into the FMLA net. Existing law requires employers to offer unpaid time off. Sen. Obama wants to change that. "It's not fair," the junior senator from Illinois explained, for workers to be "punished for getting sick or dealing with a family crisis." Obama wants improve fairness by shifting the burden to someone else. "I'll require employers to provide all of their workers with seven paid sick days a year," he promises.
This is typical of the senator's compassionate, big-hearted, progressive proposals: He's very willing to compel someone else - in this case, employers - to be generous. We can all sympathize with folks who need time off to care for a baby, an elderly parent, a sick spouse, or to recover from an illness of their own. But it's old-style political dishonesty to ignore the costs that paid mandated leave creates for businesses and coworkers. These legislated benefits raise the costs of employment, which means that firms hire fewer workers. Plenty of people would prefer higher wages to more generous sick-leave packages, but big-government regulations move those decisions from individuals to politicians - Obama would effectively outlaw your right to accept more pay in lieu of paid leave.
Small businesses would be particularly hurt by these new workplace mandates. When an employee of a large company fails to show up, work may be shifted to coworkers without a significant loss of productivity. Not so with small employers. They face high marginal costs to hire replacements and productivity may plummet when employees take unplanned time off. FMLA qualified leave will require more paperwork and compliance expense, and businesses will have new challenges when enforcing attendances policies. The net result will be slower economic growth and fewer jobs - but that damage will happen over time, and the link with Obama's regulatory burdens will be hard for most voters to see. Obama knows his "change we can believe in" won't take the blame.
It's hard to build a campaign slogan around the problems government mandates create for business. Yet voters should be concerned about these issues and the hostility that politicians so often show private-sector employers. Washington is good at making mandates, but it doesn't create jobs - at least not the kind that create wealth. Many voters say their greatest concern this election is the economy. It's ironic that so many will support a politician offering only vague hope instead of sound pro-growth policies. - The Thom Hartmann Show: Deregulating health insurance
On this week's appearance on The Thom Hartmann Show, Carrie Lukas discusses whether deregulating the health insurance will turn it into the wild, wild west.
- Long Waits = High Costs
A new study from the Centre for Spatial Economics points to the major costs of Canada's health care system:
The study of medical wait times in all 10 of Canada's provinces found excessive delays for four key procedures--total joint replacement surgery, cataract surgery, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans--cost the nation an estimated $14.8 billion in 2007.More here.
- Position Paper No. 606 Who Pays for My Time Off? The Costs and Consequences of Government-Mandated Leave
Download Position Paper No. 606 below.
Introduction
Balancing the demands of work and family life can be a challenge for any worker. Events such as severe illness or the birth of a child can make working outside the home impossible. People overwhelmingly sympathize with those facing these challenging situations and want society to support such individuals during difficult times.
In recent decades, however, the question has turned not to how civil society can support individuals in times of need, but to how the federal government can dictate how employers must accommodate employees facing these situations. Existing laws require that large employers allow qualified employees to take unpaid leave when facing such circumstances. Some policymakers want to expand these regulations so that they apply to smaller employers and to mandate the availability of additional benefits, such as paid leave.This paper examines the Family and Medical Leave Act, which mandates that businesses provide unpaid leave to their workers, and considers some of the problems associated with its application. It will also consider the potential consequences of expanding these regulations.
This paper highlights how private entities are voluntarily providing leave benefits and considers ways that policymakers can further encourage businesses and individuals to take actions that will make it easier for individuals in need of leave, without costly government mandates.
- FOX's Your World with Neil Cavuto: Clinton's Universal Healthcare
Carrie Lukas joins FOX News Your World with Neil Cavuto to discuss Clinton's plan for universal healthcare. - IWF Podcast: SCHIP
Allison Kasic interviews Carrie Lukas about SCHIP.
- IWF Policy Brief #8: SCHIP Debate Isn't About the Children: It's About Our Healthcare System's Future
Download the complete Policy Brief below.
Executive Summary
Media coverage of the Congressional debate about reauthorizing the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) has focused on the program's supposed beneficiaries: children from low-income families. Yet the debate about SCHIP has implications far beyond this one program. This debate is really about the future of America's healthcare system.
The Democratic Congressional Majority has offered legislation that would further expand the federal government's role in providing health insurance coverage to Americans. The federal role in the provision of healthcare has thus far been targeted to those (such as the poor and elderly) who would have the greatest challenges in our private system, in which most Americans obtain insurance through their employer. Democrats now seek to expand the pool of those who rely on government for health insurance to include children from middle-class families and some adults.
The President vetoed the initial legislation that was passed by Congress, and has called for a more modest increas