Health Care for All?

Today's paper brought news that the governors of two states (a Democrat in Illinois and a Republican in California) are working towards health insurance for all their citizens. While the U.S. has been so far unable to come up with a national health plan, I find the state developments in Illinois, California, and Massachusetts welcome--and I hope that, eventually, they will lead to health care for all Americans.

For the moment, it looks as though the movement towards universal healthcare will still be linked to insurance companies and at least partially tied to employment. That's too bad; the tie between health insurance and (certain kinds of) employment has persisted far too long. These days, if you are uninsured or underinsured, you risk going deeply into debt due to unexpected medical problems. Anyone who has dealt with insurance companies lately knows that the wide variety of companies and programs adds a layer of complexity for health care consumers and providers.

My perspective on this issue is influenced by the fact that I have no health insurance of my own. Freelancing, writing creatively, and raising a child may be valuable work, but they do not bring health coverage. Of course, I'm married, and thus I have more-than-adequate coverage through Tom's employer--but it seems unfair that, for some people, lack of health insurance may be a barrier to choosing jobs they love.

For two years, I was covered under England's National Health Service--and I wasn't even a citizen! While I never received anything beyond routine care, the service that I received was fine, and there was no hassle of copays, billing insurance, etc. I doubt that we will see similar universal health care coverage any time soon in the United States, but making progress in three states will be a start.