• jodi-jacobson

    I think your research is excellent and so timely.

    All of this underscores for me several critical points.  One is that passing a piece of legislation is not an endpoint.  It is a beginning, and the devil in the details of how to make law into policy into programs that actually work for people is a hugely important and often overlooked aspect of this work. 

    Another issue is how critical accountablity work–whether research or policy analysis–is to making sure laws and policies function and are accountable.

    And a third is a sense of disbelief:  Part of the problem of our health care system today is in fact what you have described above, only these problems are deeply rooted in private sector plans  as much as they are in government plans like Medicaid and Medicare…eligibility, physican referrals, formularies, paperwork, paperwork, paperwork…and indecipherable materials about your own health policy.  So it seems like health reform in Mass did not so much create as fail to alleviate and perhaps make worse what already exists.

    For example, i understand the need for eligility requirements but we seem to obsess so much that someone might get "somethin’ for nothin’" (e,g, actual health care!!) that we waste god knows how much economic productivity and lost time in paperwork…..all at the expense of the individual least able to afford those commodities.

    To me, both Massachusetts and this country have an opportunity to create an incredibly user-friendly easy to decipher, multi-reference, multi-language online tool, and a phone line for the state and federal level so that people can easily access their plans and care, so they can apply and get expeditious responses, and so forth.

    These tools would have to be backed up by a) adequate staffing by people trained not to obstruct as i feel many private insurers now do, but to facilitate the plans and the care people need; b) easy access to and training for use of computers that everyone (including with those who do not have and can not afford computers at home) can use whether at libraries or in some public spaces) c) a serious focus on the aspects of implemenation as you have so clearly laid out.

    We have the brainpower and the technology to do these things well, we need to go to communities and ask them what their needs are and how we can meet them, not devise some doomed hi-tech unusable and paper heavy program.

    Otherwise, we can legislate ourselves to death and end up with these same barriers, and fail to solve the core problem.


    Best, Jodi jacobson

  • catseye71352

    If you can’t see a doctor without an outrageous copay, YOU DON’T HAVE INSURANCE COVERAGE

    Catseye  ( (|) )

  • crowepps

    Anyone else notice that the policy discussion originally started out as how to provide ‘access to medical care’ but then quickly slid into how to provide ‘access to insurance’? Insurance is not health care. Insurance is a way of equalizing the costs of health care by widely sharing the load. The overhead costs of the insurance company directly reduce, penny for penny, the money available to pay for medical care. When insurance is set up as ‘for profit’, that profit also reduces, penny for penny, the money available to pay for medical care.

Mobile Theme