Tag: Pete Buttigieg

  • Would a public option reduce your out-of-pocket health care costs?

    Would a public option reduce your out-of-pocket health care costs?

    Democratic presidential candidates’ health care reform proposals are designed to improve upon your current coverage. But, how? Would a public option reduce out-of-pocket health care costs and guarantee Americans access to affordable health care?

    If you have traditional Medicare or a Medicare Advantage plan, Vice President Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg‘s public option proposals offer little guarantee of reducing your health care costs. They are largely designed to provide more options to working people and people without insurance today. Health care reforms proposed by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, in stark contrast, would reduce your costs substantially, ending Medicare premiums, deductibles and coinsurance and adding important benefits, including vision, hearing, dental coverage as well as home and community-based care.

    If you have employer coverage, Biden and Buttigieg offer you a Medicare-like option. You could get your health insurance through a Medicare-like system rather than a corporate health insurer if you chose. Would that help?

    Biden’s and Buttigieg’s public option proposals could help some people afford insurance coverage they cannot afford today. But, it’s not at all clear their plans would help with out-of-pocket costs. Shefali Luthra reports for Kaiser Health News that a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll reveals that about four in ten people with employer health coverage have trouble paying medical bills. About 50 percent of them delay or forego care because they can’t afford it. And, about one in six of them have to make “difficult sacrifices” to pay for their care.

    Except at the margins, Biden’s and Buttigieg’s public option proposals appear to be of little help to people with employer coverage who struggle to afford their care. They do not fill gaps in people’s coverage; they still require you to pay a lot for your health care. And, they do not offer people additional benefits that many need, such as dental, vision, hearing and home care.

    In short, the key advantage of their public option proposals is that Americans can choose not to rely on corporate insurers or employer health plans for their coverage; they give people a choice of a public plan. But, public option proposals are not likely to save Americans any money or ensure they can afford their care. Only Medicare for All proposals significantly reduce the cost of care for working people and guarantee its affordability.

    People say they prefer the public option to Medicare for All. But, most do not know that their health care costs will continue to rise under public option proposals. Once people understand that the public option does little to make health care affordable, Medicare for All should garner their support.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Top Democratic presidential candidates support strengthening Social Security

    Top Democratic presidential candidates support strengthening Social Security

    The top four Democratic presidential candidates may be split on health care reform, two favor the public option and two favor Medicare for All. But, Nancy Altman writes in Forbes that all four top candidates, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg, support strengthening and expanding Social Security. No matter who becomes the Democratic candidate, if you support expanding Social Security, it will be critical to vote.

    Social Security is a national treasure that virtually all Democratic members of Congress support expanding. In fact, nine out of ten members of the House of Representatives support Congressman John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act. If enacted, Social Security benefits would rise, and its Trust Fund would be strong for many many decades.

    Increasing Social Security benefits would  help older Americans in retirement. Today, a large portion of older adults struggle to afford their basic needs. Few people can rely on pensions or retirement savings. Many rely almost exclusively or heavily on Social Security for their income. Social Security income is guaranteed and cost-effective, unlike Wall Street stock investments and 401(k) plans.

    Most Republicans in Congress would like to cut Social Security benefits even though their constituents overwhelmingly support Social Security. They strive to create a wedge between older adults and younger Americans. In fact, young Americans need Social Security both when they retire and, now, to help support their parents and grandparents. Without adequate Social Security benefits, young Americans would be left worrying even more about their parents’ financial well-being.
    Social Security is social insurance, meaning that everyone contributes to it and everyone who contributes benefits. It builds social solidarity. Americans all count on it for themselves and their families. Social Security is an earned benefit, unlike other federal and state social programs that are for particular populations in need. For our personal and collective security, we must ensure its continued well-being.
    Social Security benefits need to be coupled with coverage for home and community-based care. Medicare for All, which Senators Sanders and Warren support, covers these long-term services. Buttigieg proposes giving people $90 a day to help with these costs, which is far more than the US guarantees older adults today. But, his plan does not come close to providing the most vulnerable Americans with adequate coverage.
    Here’s more from Just Care: