Today I found out about another free clinic where a group of Christians, without government funding, are providing charitable health care for the poor.  The clinic doesn’t bill Medicaid for any services, and provides health care for local residents up to twice the Medicaid threshold.  You won’t be seeing anything about this on the news anytime soon, but there are options out there for the uninsured, and Christians are already out there doing the work of ministry for people around them!  I’d like to see this type of clinic in every major city in the USA–it’s time for the Church to take back charity, and to do it with our own dollars.

WORLD Magazine | CrossOver appeal | Emily Belz | Sep 26, 09
CrossOver gives the uninsured regular check-ups to keep them on medications for chronic illnesses, and that protects against more costly medical services down the road. “It costs pennies to save hundreds of dollars,” says Steve Lindsey, a former administrator at a local hospital who is now on the CrossOver board. CrossOver makes use of philanthropy from hospitals, backed up by charitable donations and a host of volunteers, to provide first-class care for free.

Find the CrossOver web site here.

One reason why we’re concerned about the expansion of government health care is that occasionally decisions are made that compromise our commitment to life.  Here’s one such story from England:

Premature baby ‘left to die’ by doctors after mother gives birth just two days before 22-week care limit | Mail Online
Doctors left a premature baby to die because he was born two days too early, his devastated mother claimed yesterday.

The accusation is that the uninsured (which includes HCSM members, btw, that pay near list price for medical services) cost-shift to the insured and that this cost-shifting drives up the cost of health insurance.

It certainly may–though I’m not convinced that there is cost shifting as a group (considering both the uninsured deadbeats and the uninsured paying list price for services altogether) –but if it does, this study from AHIP (note this is a PDF) shows that it pales in comparison to the cost shifting due to Medicare and Medicaid by a factor of 5.  Medicare/Medicaid actually increase the price for other patients by 18%.

When was the last time you heard about cost-shifting due to government programs listed as one of the problems we need to solve with the coming health care “reforms?”

Just one of the good data quotes:

When broken down, we estimate the cost shift adds $1,512 annually, or 10.6%, to the premium of a family of four.  Of this cost shift amount, we estimate employers pay $1,115 and subscribers $397 annually.  The cost shift also increases member cost sharing by approximately $276 annually.

Yet again, this shows why private charity is better, and that the uninsured are not the problem.   We need to keep an eye on the reforms that are coming out of congress, because a government sponsored insurance plan (one of the more popular ideas right now) will only exacerbate this problem and further drive up costs for employers and private market payers, like cash patients including HCSM members.

HT:  Greg Scandlen via NCPA blog

Health Insurance Costs Climb Again
This year’s increase in health insurance costs was relatively small: only 5% more than last year. This means the average worker pays $3,354 out of her or his paycheck to cover 2008 health insurance premiums. The cost in 1999: $1,543.Employers pay more, too. The average employer contribution was $9,325 in 2008, up from $4,247 in 1999.

For all that money, workers get less. Deductibles and co-pays — costs people pay before insurance kicks in — are up, too. Last year, 12% of workers faced deductibles of at least $1,000. That’s up this year to 18% of all workers, and up to 35% of workers in firms with three to 199 employees.

This article came across my desk today about the same time as the news that one of our health care sharing ministries, Samaritan Ministries, is publishing a 15% reduction in shares in October.  Their members are getting what would be considered in the non-ministry world a 15% discount this month because health care needs of their members were so low in recent months.  And because these are not reserve funds that are invested, the members of health care sharing ministries are immune to any ripples from the recent financial crises.

Another way in which a personal, ministry based approach to health care costs is not only better, it’s less expensive.

Health care road show visits Wise County – Roanoke.com
The RAM clinic in Wise County is supported largely by volunteers from the University of Virginia Health System, an arm of UVa that also donated 1.5 tons of supplies, ranging from blankets to glucometers.The RAM organization itself is based in Knoxville, Tenn., and it also organizes free clinics in its home state, Kentucky and Louisiana, as well as internationally.”We go where we think the need is greatest and where we can get cooperation,” said Jean Jolly, a part-time employee who coordinates volunteer activities.

But in some states where RAM has offered to start clinics, Jolly said, certain medical specialties oppose the effort.

“It’s turf protection. You’ll find optometrists’ groups that want to charge each volunteer eye doctor $700 for the right to come and give their time for free.”

This is another example of private charity in action.  Volunteers, doing charitable work, for no compensation.  Because they want to help.  And yet, as the article points out, some oppose allowing doctors to come, including optometrists’ groups penalizing their members for volunteer service like this.

More charity like this will help those who need health care, voluntarily.  Americans are generous with their time and money–but often they need to get out in front in order to beat the government to the punch.  More things like these RAM clinics would be great–and they should be started all across the country!

RealClearPolitics – Articles – Getting Real About Health Care
It is widely assumed that health care, like most aspects of American life, shamefully shortchanges the poor. This is less true than it seems. Economist Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution recently discovered this astonishing data: on average, annual health spending per person — from all private and government sources — is equal for the poorest and the richest Americans. In 2003, it was $4,477 for the poorest fifth and $4,451 for the richest.

This was a good article about the recently released statistics regarding health care consumption by income brackets.  The current safety net system is already working well enough that the poorest 20% of Americans consumed about the same average health care costs as the richest 20%.  From these statistics (which are fairly constant across all five groups, it does not appear that any expansion of the government safety net is warranted.

Of course, private sources of health care solutions, like health care sharing ministries, are another option for the poor; an option that allows them to both bear their own load and helps keep taxpayer dollars out of health care.  Private solutions can help the poor get adequate health care while paying their own way, at least what they can afford to pay.

Some Medicaid records now open to public | GreenvilleOnline.com | The Greenville News
More than 800,000 South Carolinians receive Medicaid, which covers about half of all births in the state, or 33,314 of the 60,822 births in fiscal 2007, he said.

I met with a guy from the Heritage Foundation a while back, and he gave an interesting discourse on the history of hospitals and we had a scintillating discussion on the future of charitable health care. He posited that the idea of a charitable hospital, once crucial (in the beginning hospitals were only for the poor–those who were well off received health care at home) for charity, is no longer viable. Instead, he said, pro-life Christians should focus at beginning and end of life issues. This is the point at which a Christian philosophy of health care is under the greatest attack. Abortion and euthanasia. If Christians became the best at births and hospice, and did both in a charitable, consistently pro-life way, we could return to an era of completely private, Christian charity in health care.

Right now that market is available. If medicaid in South Carolina is paying for over half of all births, (see article linked above, HT: StateHouseCall.org) it seems likely that the pattern is similar in the other 49 states. If Christian ministries were to be started that provided low-cost birthing centers for the poor (perhaps even funded by higher cost births for the more affluent, or by straight fundraising), then a pro-life ministry can take back ground that the government health care system now holds. And private charity, privately funded, can be truly ministerial, and Jesus receives the glory.

This might be the first step in starting a distinctly pro-life counterpart to Planned Parenthood. I will be writing more on practical ways we can start this in the future.

Business balking at health changes – The Boston Globe Governor Deval Patrick’s proposal to ask businesses, insurers, and hospitals to kick in about $100 million to close a gap in funding for the state’s landmark health insurance law is threatening to fracture the fragile coalition whose support was instrumental in passing the measure.

The Massachusetts plan was claimed to have solved the “uninsured problem” (we don’t believe it was a problem at all) with a “revenue-neutral” change in moving the cost of “uncompenseted care” (funded by taxpayer dollars) to subsidized insurance plans (funded by taxpayer dollars), and then uncompensated care would disappear. All over the news these days people are talking about how wonderful this “solution” is. And now they’re looking for more taxpayer dollars to “close a gap in funding.” Hello tax increase, good-bye “revenue-neutral” “solution.” Here’s a few thoughts: FACT: When something is offered for free, people will take it. Massachusetts quickly has discovered that there are people who were paying for insurance without subsidies who now are taking advantage of the subsidies. FACT: The alleged problem isn’t solved. There are still a large number of uninsured in MA. And now the uninsured will be punished (via taxes and penalties) for not buying insurance like the state told them to. A better solution would have been to eliminate the taxpayer sponsored uncompensated care and to find a way to encourage private charity, like some motivated, generous people are doing in New Jersey. And one way to encourage donations to private charity is to make sure private citizens keep more of their dollars after taxes.

Agency expects more to appeal healthcare fee – The Boston Globe
The Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority set aside $3.3 million – nearly 10 percent of its $39 million fiscal 2009 budget, which it finalized yesterday – for the 8,000 appeals the board expects to process. In the year that ended June 30, there were an estimated 2,000 to 2,500 appeals, the board said.

This is the problem with not approaching health care with liberty, charity and faith in balance.  It leaves to forcing people into a particular system, which leads to punishing them for not doing it “right”.  The article goes on to say that the requirements for what is “legitimate” insurance will get harder next year as well, raising the cost even higher, thus raising the stakes for those who would like to try to afford what they say.

Thankfully, health care sharing ministry members have, at present, been granted a regulatory status that fulfulls the intent of the mandate–allowing our members to continue to practice their faith in Massachusetts.  At least for now.

What We’ve Learned From the Massachusetts Health Plan – WSJ.com
Our plan said no to “free-riders.” Massachusetts residents are now required to have health insurance. For those earning less than 300% of the federal poverty level, there is a subsidized insurance program called Commonwealth Care.

Former Governor Romney has some laud and praise for his baby, the Massachusetts mandated health insurance.

The quote above is enough to see the rose-colored glasses through which the former presidential candidate is viewing the program.  Here’s your math:  “no free-riders” = “government subsidized insurance programs”.

Seems to me that this creates a new kind of free-rider without solving the other alleged one.  There are still thousands of uninsured in Massachusetts while  the program is overrunning cost estimates by considerable margins.

Maybe we should return to private charity and free markets?