Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
national nealtn care bill, would result, leaving more health care dollars to serve the true medical need.
Many caregivers and institutions must charge more for providing services to those who can afford payment or who have coverage to balance those who cannot or will not seek coverage. Total inclusion would eliminate this expensive cost shifting, saving billions of dollars annually.
Since the individual would be purchasing his own coverage, the employer would now be free of the burden of providing personnel to oversee employee health benefits, thereby increasing productivity. It would prevent employer discrimination based on an applicant’s health history.
Indigent people receiving government assistance often must resort to sporadic health care through an emergency room at f<Mir times the normal cost. Now, witRfjfull coverage, everyone could seek preventive health care though their own family physician, which would provide continuity of care. Care provided by a family physician can often promote better health care habits, a factor which within itself, could save $100 billion annually.
Total inclusion created by each individual purchasing health care coverage would allow the insurance companies to be the single payer muchanism. In terms of payments, paperwork, etc, everyone would appear identical. This second crucial step of health care reform would eliminate the redundant and cumbershome system in which several different organizations screen treatments. Following this, a confusing payment system results, leaving caregivers and patients vacillating over payment sources.
A single payer typically refers to the government as being the payer. Under a system run by the government, if the bureaucracy offers poor service due to a cumbersome or outof-money system, regardless of the good intentions of the individual bureaucrats, patient alternatives are virtually nonexistent. Although insurance companies have been known to offer poor service, a system in which individuals can choose their insurance carrier will provide motivation for that company to keep that customer satisfied and allow the dissatisfied customer the option of choosing another carrier. Unfortunately, since there is only one government, this option would not be available in a government run system.
94.9%