July 29th, 2009

Two of the latest opinion pieces on what could be done to reform healthcare in PA come from the Times-Tribune editors and health insurance company Independence Blue Cross.

The editorial from the Times-Tribune calls for a statewide health care plan for public school teachers.  Write the editors:

“One of the smartest things that the state government could do for local taxpayers would be to mandate a statewide health care plan for public school teachers.

For years, lawmakers have been well aware of the financial benefits of such a plan. In 2004 the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, which includes members of both houses, commissioned a study of the potential savings that would result from establishing a single health care plan to cover all state employees and public education employees. The study found that had such a plan been in effect for the 2002-2003 school year, taxpayers would have saved a whopping $585 million in health care costs.

A bill introduced recently in the state House would pick up where that study ended. It would create a Public School Employees’ Benefits Board to update that study, then design a statewide health benefits plan for school employees.

The need for such a plan existed before the current state budget problems. Taxpayers pay more than $1.5 billion every year for public school health care plans, about 16 percent of all school property taxes. Even if the savings projected in 2004 could be realized, the statewide plan could reduce those local costs by a third.

An added advantage of such an arrangement is that it would help to alleviate vast economic disparities among Pennsylvania’s 500 school districts, a longtime state goal.

State employees work in every corner of Pennsylvania and are covered by common health plans. Teachers themselves belong to a statewide common pension plan.”

Read the rest of the editorial here.

Meanwhile, the CEO of Independence Blue Cross, Joseph Frick, says that the federal healthcare reform should build on the existing healthcare system.  He writes:

“Polls show that 70 percent of Americans believe our health-care system needs an overhaul. Yet more than 80 percent of those who have coverage are satisfied with it and don’t want to give it up. So Americans want to reform what’s broken without breaking what’s working.

That’s why we support comprehensive health-care reform that provides affordable, high-quality coverage to everyone by building on the employer-based system that’s serving 170 million Americans. We agree with the key provisions of the reform package developing in Washington: ensuring everyone is covered, guaranteeing coverage for preexisting conditions, making coverage portable, simplifying the purchase of insurance, helping working families and small businesses afford insurance, and researching which treatments work to make care more consistent and effective.

Above all, we believe that reform must include a real effort to reduce the growth of health-care costs, ensuring that coverage is affordable and the system is sustainable. We believe health-insurance plans are showing how that can be done: by simplifying administration; redesigning payment to doctors and hospitals so that it rewards quality; expanding wellness, disease-management, and prevention efforts; and using more information technology to keep people healthy.

We also believe we ought to give these reforms a chance without the introduction of a new government-run plan. A government plan would dismantle employer-based health coverage, undermining the president’s pledge that people who like their health-care plans and doctors will be able to keep them. Some estimates suggest that more than 119 million people would move to a new government-run plan in its first year.”

Read the rest of his op-ed here.

And then, COMMENT, readers!  Who do you agree with?  Who do you disagree with?  Why?