At Blue Mass, Charlie asks why the local business community opposes reasonable attempts to reform health care, despite the rising costs they face in providing health insurance to their employees:
I can’t blame businesses one bit for wanting to get out from under or avoid entirely the crushing weight of health care costs. But for a group which calls itself "Massachusetts Businesses for Real Health Care Reform" to merely defend a status quo that crushes job growth and health care alike, is not so much Orwellian as ironic and sad. What is so damn great about the system we have, unless you’re an employer that’s on the public dole, depending on taxpayers to cover your employees’ doctor visits? And even then, your employees’ health suffers, affecting your productivity and bottom line. How short-sighted….
There is a real lack of vision in much of the business community in Massachusetts. It’s a shame, because we could really use their help. What do you guys want?
I’m not up-to-speed with the ins-and-outs of health plans floating around. And I obviously can’t speak for the minds of MA business leaders. But my hunch is that there’s a simple reason the business community is doing what they’re doing. It’s obvious that we have a health care cost crisis on hand, both locally and nationally (check out the NewsHour’s report from last night, which was an excellent summary of the problem). It’s obvious that between the legislature and the corner office, some plan will be ironed out to address some of the more pressing problems (particularly emergency rooms and the free care pool). What’s really up for grabs is how comprehensive provision of health services will be and who will pick up the tab. Liberals, organizing around DiMasi’s plan, are stressing universal, quality coverage. I suspect the business community would be happier with a lower quality at a lower cost to them. It’s one thing to point out that preventative care can save money down the road, but at some point more and better health services mean more resources spent.
The business community would clearly like to pay less of those resources and put more on the onus of individual consumers. The reason they don’t want to give up a employer-provided insurance system is that they fear that those pushing for a state-run health system will be too generous in their benefits and too willing to use distributive taxation to do so. This hunch of mine is based on no evidence whatsoever, so I’d be curious to hear your thoughts, but it’s an explanation that seems to make sense of the way political interests seem to be lining up in Beacon Hill.
No comments have been added to this post yet.