and when 10,000 sick people all move there for the free medical... then what???
Posted on 07/18/2006 5:47:21 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SAN FRANCISCO
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to make the city the nation's first to provide all residents with health care, approving a plan that would give adults access to medical services regardless of their immigration or employment status.
Financed by local government, mandatory contributions from employers and income-adjusted premiums, the universal care plan would cover the cost of everything from checkups, prescription drugs and X-rays to ambulance rides, blood tests and operations.
Unlike health insurance, however, it would not pay for any services participants seek outside San Francisco. Instead, residents would receive care at existing clinics and public hospitals and from doctors who already participate in an HMO for low- and middle-income clients.
With backing from both Mayor Gavin Newsom and all 11 supervisors, the so-called Health Access Plan proved to be a politically popular concept in liberal San Francisco despite unmitigated opposition from the business community.
"What feels very good is the full board and the mayor getting on board," said Supervisor Tom Ammiano, who first championed the idea of making employers pay for some part of their workers' medical costs. "That says the political will is there to make it happen."
To offset the estimated annual price tag of $200 million, firms with 20 or more workers would be required to spend $1.06 for each hour worked by an employee, and those with more than 100 workers would have to pay $1.60 per hour up to a monthly maximum of $180 per worker. Companies that already offer health coverage would still have to pay if their insurance contributions did not meet the city's funding levels.
The Board of Supervisors still needs to vote on the plan once more for it to become final. The ordinance adopted Tuesday calls for businesses with more than 50 employees to start participating starting next July, while it would take effect for enterprises with 20 or more workers in April 2008.
Michael O'Connor, a nightclub owner who serves on the San Francisco Small Business Commission, predicted that the "noble burden" of the mandate would keep businesses from locating in the city and make goods and services here more expensive as employers pass on the costs to customers.
O'Connor said many business owners were disappointed by Newsom's backing of the plan since the mayor got his start in business as the owner of a wine shop and several restaurants.
"One would think that someone who has owned and opened restaurants would be pretty clear on what the profit margin is, and how hard it is to get them open. A $5,000 licensing fee is difficult. A new $60,000 (health care) fee is disabling," he said.
Before the board vote, Newsom defended the proposal as a creative solution to the problem of securing decent health care for uninsured residents, noting that businesses would not be alone in defraying the costs. Of the $200 million, the city would provide $104 million and participants would contribute about $56 million.
"This is a moral debate as much as a political debate," Newsom said.
The initiative adopted Tuesday developed as a compromise between Newsom and Ammiano, who last year introduced legislation that would have required businesses to create health savings accounts for uninsured workers. In a nod to concerns from business, the final plan requires employees to work at least 12 hours a week to be eligible and has an opt-out provision for workers who are insured through their spouses.
Because fees would be adjusted on a sliding scale, city officials did not expect to see a rush of residents canceling their existing health insurance to take part in the city program.
>>>>Financed by local government
Do they still get to bill federally for Medicaid?
No need to wait six months for SF to go bankrupt!
These psychopaths are really over the edge. What this means is, that every rotten, disease-ridden, mentally deranged, drug infested bum that stumbles into town will now be taken care of in grand style by the already overly taxed business interests in this once nice, but now rotten, city. The only silver lining is that the rest of California will now be able to watch the bumbling morons (like Ammiano) run San Francisco into the bankruptcy courts. I pity the over-worked medical personnel in San Francisco General. I predict the place will go belly up within two years.
Oh boy! Free Drugs in San Francisco!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563271/posts?page=23#23
This is Hillary's Health Care project. I have found a number of university hospitals signed on this this and taking funding.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1561077/posts?page=21#21
This initiative was stimulated by President Clinton's commitment to eliminate disparities in health for racial and ethnic minority populations by 2010.
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D2C8F49F-400E-467E-ACF2-6255D6E9FDEA/0/Nadrc0900.pdf
DHHS OFFICE OF HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION
AND THE HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010 INITIATIVE
(major snip)
Dr. Randy Wykoff, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, DHHS, presented an overview of Healthy People 2010, including the Leading Health Indicators, and possible ways to maximize this initiative. Healthy People 2010 is coordinated by the DHHS Office for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
Dr. Wykoff noted that Healthy People 2010 is a comprehensive set of national 10-year objectives that are developed through a collaborative process involving both the public and private sectors. All the objectives are specific and measurable over time based on data. The document, published and distributed by the Federal Government, also is a statistical description of the health status of Americans, including racial and ethnic disparities; a textbook on current public health priorities; and an important part of the national strategic plan for improving health. Healthy People 2010 is the third iteration of an effort that began in 1979 with publication of the Surgeon General's Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. Ever larger and more complex, this iteration has two overarching goals, 28 focus areas, 467 objectives, and 10 leading health indicators.
(major snip)
Grant Review
The Council considered 327 applications requesting $70,492,343 in total costs. The Council recommended
238 applications for a total cost of $31,211,337 (see Attachment II).
UMDNJ is a publicly interest member of this initiative.
Members:
r. Hillary Brode, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ)- New Jersey Dental School, Newark
UMDNJ's Fraud Investigation case:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1593821/posts
"Oh boy! Free Drugs in San Francisco!"
As well as "free" post-overdose treatment. I can hear the city's Debt-o-meter clicking now...
They are defecting....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1666405/posts
Castro's Overseas Doctors Fleeing Venezuela
Hey, waitaminute!!! This Highland piper is neither hungry, greedy (I hope!), nor need... oh... nevermind.... I understand. *\;-)
Who wants to be the first to point out how ridiculously low that number is?
Got horrendous medical bills? Are you an illegal alien? Get free medical care in San Francisco, not just Emergency Room care.
Heck, I guess I'm glad they're doing this. We need to get the word out on the street of our local towns and cities that there's a free lunch in San Francisco.
Skeedaddle boys!
and when 10,000 sick people all move there for the free medical... then what???
LOL -- the piper not the BAGpiper!
$200M / 744,000 (population of SF) = $269/person in medical expenses... uh huh...
See how easy it is to spend other people's money??? Govt does it all the time. Every warning label, safety regulation and most of the social benefits cost other people money, not the actual implementing entity.
Obviously the people in SF pay too much in taxes if the city has this kind of money to throw around.
if they get any fed tax money, I want it cut off. I don't want my money going to pay for this communism.
Say WA? Evergreen State ping
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this ping list.
Ping sionnsar if you see a Washington state related thread.
This really is going to be fun to watch.
In 2004 (the latest year data are available), total national health expenditures rose 7.9 percent -- over three times the rate of inflation. Total spending was $1.9 TRILLION in 2004, or $6,280 per person. (Source: Smith, C., C. Cowan, A. Sensenig and A. Catlin. "Health Spending Growth Slows in 2004." Health Affairs 25:1 (2006): 186-196.)
So if the population of SF is 744,000, then health expenditures would be expected to exceed $4.6Billion. A tad higher than $200Million.
To offset the estimated annual price tag of $200 million, firms with 20 or more workers would be required to spend $1.06 for each hour worked by an employee, and those with more than 100 workers would have to pay $1.60 per hour up to a monthly maximum of $180 per worker. Companies that already offer health coverage would still have to pay if their insurance contributions did not meet the city's funding levels.
Gee, If I had a San Francisco business with 21 employees, two of my workers are going to lose their jobs tomorrow. Sad. Too bad. This is the "Law of Unintended Consequences"...
And ya gotta figure that they just made themselves an illegal magnet in the process. Yeah, oodles of fun to watch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.