Just as the deal was being struck on the stimulus package, the News Hour on PBS aired a segment about people who had lost their jobs and could not afford to continue their health insurance under COBRA, the program that allows them to keep their coverage for awhile. As these kinds of stories go, the piece was workmanlike and predictable enough. When asked what she had to give up, one woman replied “All the Christmas presents I used to get for everybody.”
If anything, the segment’s underlying theme was that Medicaid can be helpful and there’s no shame in applying for it. “Had any of you ever in your lives needed to ask the government for help before?” inquired correspondent Betty Ann Bowser. “It was always them, never me. This is my first time that I asked for help,” one man replied. Bowser then asked: “And what did it feel like going into that office to apply for Medicaid?” The man said he “didn’t feel bad at all.”
At the end, PBS anchor Judy Woodruff noted “for the record” that the stimulus package included more federal aid to states to help pay increasing Medicaid costs. She said the bill would “provide a federal subsidy to help some laid-off workers purchase health insurance through the COBRA program, but the subsidy would be smaller than initially proposed.” That was it. No mention of how much the subsidy would be, or how much it might have been if the lobbyists had not gotten in the way. No mention of how the people featured might have fared under the two proposals in the House version that didn’t make the final cut. No mention of what all this might mean for universal coverage. Obama and other pols have said they wanted to build on the public/private insurance arrangements we already have, and some experts had thought the House expansions might have been one way to start construction. The PBS segment would have been much more informative if it had talked more about all this and less about people who couldn’t buy Christmas gifts.
To refresh your memory: The House bill would have allowed workers laid off because of the recession to obtain Medicaid coverage until 2011, without having to meet Medicaid’s usual requirements for income and assets. (Recipients can’t have much of either.) This provision would have helped workers from small businesses (fewer than twenty employees) who don’t qualify for COBRA. Under the House plan, workers age 55 to 64 or those who had been at the job at least ten years could have stayed on COBRA, paying all the premiums themselves until they became eligible for Medicare. That might have been the beginning of guaranteed coverage for a group of older workers who often have a tough time buying on their own in the private market, where insurers slam the door if applicants have health problems. People in this age group often do.
PBS was not alone, however, in missing the mark. We in the media tend toward fanfare and exuberance when reporting on a final legislative product—a celebration, if you will, of the difficult feat of passing a law. But often these “wrap-ups” fail to mention what got left behind in the back rooms where the deals with lobbyists were made, let alone the significance of these omissions to the public. The stimulus bill was no exception.
The AP, for instance, issued one story that simply said “the Obama plan offers a 60 percent subsidy to help unemployed people pay health insurance premiums under the COBRA program…” Another story, written by an AP special correspondent a day later, reported that the legislation “provides billions of dollars to aid victims of the recession through unemployment benefits, food stamps, medical care, job retraining and more.”
- 1
- 2
Why didn't the media cover who on Olympia Snowe's staff was responsible for eliminating the COBRA extensions for older workers?
#1 Posted by AFuller, CJR on Tue 17 Feb 2009 at 08:57 PM
Look, it wasn't "lobbyists" who were responsible for reducing the COBRA subsidy it was the REPUBLICANS. Don't give them a pass on that. Get your facts straight. The COBRA provisions were reduced in negotiations in the reconciliation between the House and Senate versions, and Olympia Snowe insisted the subsidies be reduced. Lobbyists had nothing to do with it.
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/DAILY_REPORTS/rep_hpolicy.cfm
#2 Posted by Tom Traubert, CJR on Wed 18 Feb 2009 at 01:28 AM
This whole stimulus bill is ridicules. It does nothing to create long term jobs. These are all short term projects that they want to do. What are all of these people working on these projects going to do once everything is fixed? They will be jobless without any where to turn and the economy will go back down. If we are going to throw money around, lets throw some into creating jobs outside of the government. One job resource that could us a jolt of life is our manufacturing industry. I was reading articles over at americanboom.com about how much of this problem could have been avoided if we had not outsourced all of our manufacturing to China. We need to stop relying on the government to bail us out and start bailing each other out. If we support companies that employ Americans then maybe they will not move to China.
#3 Posted by Kenny Hatcher, CJR on Wed 18 Feb 2009 at 11:59 AM
Good story on COBRA. This is big news affecting millions yet it was buried by the MSM. Until the media starts digging deeply into COBRA, ERISA, Medicaid, etc., the prospects for meaningful health care reform are slim indeed.
#4 Posted by Marty Chase, CJR on Wed 18 Feb 2009 at 07:32 PM
The COBRA provision of the stimulus bill will not help as many people as previously hoped due to the significant built-in requirements and limitations. But there is an up side. Health insurance companies are now scrambling to come up with more palatable alternatives that are not subject to these limitations and presumably would not be hit so hard by the adverse selection that drives up COBRA rates. I covered "first thoughts" on this at http://medsave.com/healthinsurance/?p=119 last week.
#5 Posted by Kim Morris, CJR on Sat 21 Feb 2009 at 09:13 AM
Thanks for the insights and critique. One detail that puzzles me is how Sept. 1, 2008, was chosen as the starting point for eligibility for the COBRA subsidy. I've asked my congressmen that question; no one has an answer. I and 100 of my fellow employees lost our jobs at the Daytona Beach News-Journal last June. We were hoping for a COBRA subsidy (Florida's maximum unemployment benefit is a paltry $275 a week), but our hopes apparently were in vain.
#6 Posted by Tom Brown, CJR on Mon 23 Feb 2009 at 06:50 AM
As a health insurance broker, I am acutely aware of the shortfalls of any and all that I have heard so far. While it is no shame to apply for medicaid if one needs it, the RULE is that you cannot even apply it you are at least 3 months without health insurance. Then comes the waiting period. At the moment, the wait is about 21 months. Our health care system is completely broken. People go on COBRA when they are uninsurable. This is because COBRA costs more than other plans. If they do not get another job with Health Insurance that is without underwriting, they will bear the full brunt of the risk after 18 months when COBRA runs out.
For heaven's sake ... why can't the brilliant minds in Washington come up with a real solution??? I will be happy to lose my Health Insurance portfolio for the greater good if the government can come up with a comprehensive plan. All we have are expensive plans that serve no real good.
#7 Posted by Peter Eng, CJR on Tue 24 Feb 2009 at 05:45 PM