National Nurses United

NewsBriefs SinglePayer Plan Reintroduced in California or carpenter Kyle Harvey and his coworkers in the Stockton Unified School District in northern California, defending their health insurance benefits from unaffordable contribution increases in the past few years has been like bailing water from a boat with a big gash in the bottom. They could delay the inevitable for a while, but eventually the boat would sink. Four years ago, Harvey and his colleagues in the California School Employees Association paid $5 per month toward their premiums. The next year it got upped to $40. The year after, it spiked to $180. Last year, the district wanted workers to pay a whopping $400 per month. They managed to negotiate that price down, but Harvey knows it's only a matter of time. "Remember, our average school worker gets paid $22,000 a year," said Harvey. "And these aren't Cadillac plans, either." As their contributions have gone up, their benefits have been cut. Workers have also given up raises year after year; any pay increases have instead gone toward rising healthcare costs. Harvey added that some of his coworkers are choosing between paying the mortgage or buying health insurance, or signing up their kids for state-subsidized plans and skipping insurance for themselves. Countless other Californians are in the same damaged boat as Harvey and his colleagues. Middle-class workers are increasingly finding health insurance premiums and deductibles unaffordable while plans cover less and less. In response, California State Senator Sheila Kuehl on Jan. 27 reintroduced SB 840, a bill that F would establish single-payer healthcare coverage for California residents. Under the legislation, all Californians would have health insurance—paid for through a combination of individual and employer-paid taxes, government funds, and savings from the one-third of each healthcare dollar that would no be wasted on costly administrative functions—that they could use at whichever public or private providers they chose. Doctors, hospitals, clinics, and pharmacies operate as usual; what changes is that they seek reimbursement from one payer, the healthcare agency that administers the money, instead of scrambling to figure out and properly bill different insurers. At the same time, the government has greater ability to negotiate for fair prices with providers and pharmaceutical companies to ensure the public is getting the best deals with its healthcare dollars. CNA/NNOC is principal sponsor of SB 840, and dozens of legislators have signed on as coauthors. Both the state Assembly and Senate passed the same bill last year, but Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it. Instead, he has proposed a plan to require all individuals to buy their own insurance from the private insurance market, but without imposing any caps on costs or requiring minimum coverage levels. Other state legislators, including Senate President Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, have also submitted variations of this plan. Critics say these proposals essentially create a large captive market for insurance companies to sell Californians junk insurance. "Giving insurance companies more customers would be like treating cancer or asthma CALIFORNIA 6 REGISTERED NURSE W W W. C A L N U R S E S . O R G with cigarette smoke," said Deborah Burger, RN and CNA/NNOC president at a Jan. 27 press conference announcing the bill filing. "Incremental efforts have failed our families and communities." Coinciding with the reintroduction of SB 840, CNA/NNOC launched a radio ad and mail campaign to educate the public about the pitfalls of market-based proposals and why CNA/NNOC President Californians would Deborah Burger, RN best benefit from a lends support at single-payer plan. an SB 840 press Kuehl said Caliconference while fornia's health insurbill author Sen. ance system needs Sheila Kuehl (left) dramatic reform, but and other legislators emphasized that sinlook on. gle-payer is not new. Medicare, a single-payer system, has been in effect since 1965. Under Kuehl's plan, individuals would contribute about 3.5 to 4 percent of their earnings toward the fund. Employers would pitch in about 7.5 percent of payroll. If employers wish to keep paying their employees' share, they could do so. The system would spend about 5 percent, instead of 30, toward administration. Businesses that are finding it impossible to keep up with escalating health insurance premiums for their workers are starting to embrace the single-payer approach. John Hughes, president and founder of a Los Angeles computer animation and visual effects company, spoke at the press conference about how burdensome health insurance costs impede his company's ability to compete globally with companies located in countries that provide national healthcare. "And even despite our high costs, insurance companies have denied many of our employees' claims," said Hughes. Not surprisingly, the insurance industry vehemently opposes SB 840. Kuehl, who chairs the Senate's health committee, said that despite the other proposals floating, SB 840 will not get watered down and will move through the Legislature intact. "I have no doubt it will go to the governor's desk," she said. "We will work to convince him that it's the best way to go." —lucia hwang MARCH 2007

• Cover