Paying More, Getting Less
By Joel A. Harrison | May/June 2008
If more people understood the full size of the health care bill that they as individuals are already paying—and for a system that provides seriously inadequate care to millions of Americans—then the corporate opponents of a universal single-payer system might find it far more difficult to frighten the public about the costs of that system.
Read more »
Inequality: Bad for Your Health
An Interview with Ichiro Kawachi | January/February 2008
How do you stay healthy? That's a no brainer, right? Eat the right foods, exercise, quit smoking, get regular medical checkups. Social epidemiologist Ichiro Kawachi wants to add a new item to the list: live in a relatively egalitarian society. Kawachi has carried out a wide range of research studies on the social and economic factors that account for average health outcomes in different societies. Among his most novel conclusions is that people in societies with high levels of economic inequality are less healthy than those living in more equal societies, regardless of their absolute levels of income. Read more »
The Opposite of Insurance
By James Woolman | November/December 2006
Unless you're rich, healthy, or both, Health Savings Accounts are bad news. New research on consumer and employer experiences with HSAs shows that these plans attract relatively high-income, healthy people who are attracted to the tax benefits, while they place other consumers—including those with families, health problems, or low incomes—at risk for steep increases in out-of-pocket spending.
Read more »
Medicare and Medicaid Cuts: (Almost) Everyone Pays
By Sam Uretsky | July/August 2006
Unless you belong to the select and dwindling group of those with fully employer-paid health coverage—or to the 40-million-and-counting with no health insurance at all—you've probably noticed your health insurance premiums rising at a frightening pace. There is plenty of blame to go around for rising health insurance costs. But an under-recognized part of the story lies in the shifting of costs from public to private insurers. Read more »
Medicare Part D Gets an "F"
By James Woolman and James McBride | January/February 2006
Medicare Part D, the new drug
benefit package that went
into effect on January 1, is
projected to cost $724 billion
over 10 years. Not only is it expensive, it's
confusing, and it provides more benefits
to insurance companies than to enrollees.
Here are five key reasons Medicare Part
D deserves an "F".
Read more »
Job-Based Health Insurance: Sick and Getting Sicker
By James Woolman | May/June 2004
Job-based health insurance is terminally ill. A long-term decline in the percentage of workers who get health insurance through their jobs and a sharp rise in monthly costs are giving workers a bad case of "un-surance." They now bear more of the costs of medical care and are less certain than ever that their health benefits will be there in the future.
Read more »
