Gotham Gazette
Gotham Gazette Web
Baruch School of Public Affairs

email this article

most emailed articles


Health of the Union
January 24th, 2007

Since 1.7 million New Yorkers lack health insurance, you might expect any effort to address that would be welcome here. But President George W. Bush’s health care proposal, announced in last night’s State of the Union speech got generally poor reviews in the city. The plan would provide a tax deduction for people who buy their own insurance, seek to limit expensive health insurance plans and take money away from Medicaid payments and give it to the states in the form of something called “affordable choice grants.” That, the Daily News reports, could cost the city’s public hospitals and other medical facilities $350 million a year.

If the proposal is enacted (which many say is unlikely), Alan Aviles, president of the Health and Hospitals Corporation, said in the
Times, “We would have to do a wholesale dismantling of our ambulatory care system and scale down our emergency departments.” “This is an anti-New York provision….It hurts the poor and is a dagger at the heart of New York’s fiscal budget,” Senator Chuck Schumer told the News.

In general, commentators questioned whether the plan would do much to address the health-care crisis confronting New York and the entire country. In his speech, the
Times said, the president “acted as if he were really doing something to help the 47 million people in this country who don’t have health insurance.” But the editorial says, what he would actually do is “take a few million off that scandalously high number and shift the burden to the states,” while placing “a new tax on Americans who were lucky enough to still have good health-care coverage through their employers.”

Daily Gotham was similarly unimpressed, writing that Bush’s plan “was designed not for the purpose of getting more people insured, but primarily to reinforce the idea that private insurance is the way forward in health care.” In its analysis, the Drum Major Institute said the “‘market-based’ proposals favor the wealthy and healthy to the detriment of the sick, poor, and anyone who suffers a medical emergency.”

Health Care Economist examined the pros and the cons and concluded the minuses outweigh the pluses: “The plan does little to help those who need insurance most. The dollars saved from eliminating the deductibility of employer-provided health insurance could be used in a much more productive fashion to provide health care to more Americans.”

By Gail Robinson on January 24, 2007, 8:50 am
In category: Gotham City, Health
Recommend this entry via: stumble upon | digg | del.icio.us |

2 Responses to “Health of the Union”

  1. Larry Littlefield Says:
    January 24th, 2007 at 10:27 am

    We need on solution for everyone, not one thousand little deals that can be adjusted depending on the political importance of individual groups. That solution must finance basic health care for all (not just seniors), based on taxes collected from all, at the federal level — leaving individuals, states and charities to pay for more if they choose.

    The President wants to remove tax deductability for rich employer provided health insurance? Fine, as part of a single univeral plan. To hell with it otherwise. Let’s provide something to everyone, rather than everything to some and nothing to others, at the federal level. Scrap the whole existing mess!

  2. Health Insurance Plans » Legislation Introduced Related To HPV (Health insurance plans) Vaccine, Abortion, Drug Use During Pregnancy In Idaho, Indiana, Nevada, …  Says:
    January 26th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    [...] THIS SITE Spot a published piece that would fit this blog? Let us know about it, at blog@gothamgazette.com Since 1.7 million New Yorkers lack health insurance , you might expect any effort to address that would be welcome here. [...]

Leave a Reply