Access to affordable health care in the United States has been a major problem for years. Perhaps nowhere has it been worse than in Mississippi. And the Affordable Care Act (ACA), often referred to as Obamacare, has not made health care more accessible or affordable in Mississippi, according to two journalists there.
Writing for Columbia
Journalism Review, Trudy Lieberman praises Sarah Varney, a senior
correspondent for Kaiser Health News, and
Jeffrey Hess of Mississippi Public Broadcasting, who contributed
research and reporting, for a “Letter from Mississippi,” which thoroughly and
poignantly details “how the poorest, sickest state got left behind by
Obamacare.”
Their account, published in the November/December issue of
Politico Magazine and on the Kaiser Health News website, analyzed “Obamacare’s
year-long struggle for respectability and viability in the poorest state in the
union,” writes Lieberman.
They asked the following question: Can a private system of
health insurance and subsidies for buying coverage work in a state with very
poor people who have high rates of disease, lack education, and for whom buying
insurance is like learning Turkish? “Add to that an uncooperative political
infrastructure,” writes Lieberman, “and the answer at this point seems to be
no.”
Given that Mississippi suffers from a high incidence of
diabetes, heart disease, obesity and the highest mortality rate in the nation,
Obamacare barely registered there. In fact, according to one analysis Varney
cites, “Mississippi would be the only state in the union where the percentage
of uninsured residents has gone up, not down.”
Varney blames many factors on this failure, including
“political infighting, an overwhelmed federal agency and a surprise decision
from the Supreme Court.” Only about 20 percent of the state’s residents
eligible for Obamacare coverage have signed up. The “most significant drag on
sign-ups,” Varney writes, “was Mississippi’s decision not to expand Medicaid,”
which left some 138,000 low-income residents, most of whom are black, without
insurance options.
Varney also points out inequalities that are part of the
ACA, such as high deductibles and other high cost-sharing requirements. A
54-year old waitress got a policy for $129, Varney writes, only to discover she
first had to pay $6,350 out of pocket. She cancelled the policy.
These articles focus on Mississippi, which also has the
highest rate of leg amputations in the country (for African Americans, this
number is particularly “startling,” Varney writes) and a high rate of breast
cancer deaths despite a low incidence rate. However, many of the problems with
health care apply as well to many other states.
Lieberman makes the point that this story is not being told
many places. She writes: “Several of the issues Varney details—like inequality,
the loss of federal funds for safety-net hospitals, and the continuing
political hostility to health insurance for the uninsured—are not unique to
Mississippi and merit attention from reporters around the country.”
In my own state of Kansas, for example, where Medicaid is
not being expanded, health care is not being addressed adequately.
While politicians play political football with Obamacare,
health-care costs continue to rise.
One culprit (of many), according to an article in Pacific Standard (July/August) notes the
overuse of CT scans, often done before doing a simple physical exam. When one
patient whose problem was already identified objected to having a scan done
because of the exorbitant cost, the doctor said, “Why do you care? Your
insurance will cover it.”
The trouble is, too many of us don’t care. And those making
the decisions seem to care even less about these costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment