A common conservative meme is to claim that US health care is superior to other countries by telling stories of people coming here from abroad to seek medical care. Often the stories of people coming here because of inadequate care at home are distorted. After all, while the US does provide excellent care in many areas, overall it does have the worst health care delivery system in the industrialized world.
If conservatives are right that a health care system should be judged based upon citizens who feel compelled to travel to other countries, our system also shows problems. Medical tourism is becoming increasingly common. While people in countries such as the UK sometimes travel because of long waits (making me relieved that a system such as they have in the UK is not being considered in the United States), many Americans travel to other countries because of cost. According to Newsweek, more than twenty percent of American medical tourists surveyed had no medical insurance.
For the real bargain hunters, USA Today provides a nearby option:
It sounds almost too good to be true: a health care plan with no limits, no deductibles, free medicines, tests, X-rays, eyeglasses, even dental work — all for a flat fee of $250 or less a year.
To get it, you just have to move to Mexico.
As the United States debates an overhaul of its health care system, thousands of American retirees in Mexico have quietly found a solution of their own, signing up for the health care plan run by the Mexican Social Security Institute.
The system has flaws, the facilities aren’t cutting-edge, and the deal may not last long because the Mexican government said in a recent report that it is “notorious” for losing money. But for now, retirees say they’re getting a bargain.
“It was one of the primary reasons I moved here,” said Judy Harvey of Prescott Valley, who now lives in Alamos, Sonora. “I couldn’t afford health care in the United States. … To me, this is the best system that there is.”
It’s unclear how many Americans use IMSS, but with between 40,000 and 80,000 U.S. retirees living in Mexico, the number probably runs “well into the thousands,” said David Warner, a public policy professor at the University of Texas.
“They take very good care of us,” said Jessica Moyal, 59, of Hollywood, Fla., who now lives in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, a popular retirement enclave for Americans.
Hey Ron- My comment may be a little off the wall, but you might be use to that by now. If you were the end-all negotiator for health care reform, and you got into some horse trade type deal like: “If you give us a cap on medical tort claims, we’ll give you…” what would be your top priorities? Just play that you could have a range of 1 to 3 items of the health care bill and had to give up the other parts, which one or ones would you pick?
travel insurance » Americans Seeking Health Care In Foreign Countries Liberal Values: One needn&.. http://bit.ly/BoTlW
travel insurance » Americans Seeking Health Care In Foreign Countries Liberal Values: One needn&.. http://bit.ly/BoTlW
It’s not really a cap on tort claims I’m interested in. With regards to tort reform already being done, efforts to weed out frivolous claims at the start do far more good. My ultimate goal would be to separate compensation for victims of medical errors from the legal system since the current system primarily benefits attorneys and not those who deserve compensation.
As to what I would give up, I’d go with the mandates since I opposed them from the start. Of course this would mean revising other parts of the plan to reduce the free rider problem.
Thanks, but I think you may have misread my intent. I was writing from the position that you wouldn’t want or atleast not care about additional tort reform. Then pretending you were brokering a deal with the opposition, if they said: “Give us tort reform XYZ and we will agree to give you…(fill in the blank)” as the thing you wanted most about the current proposed bill. But still your answer was enlightening.
PUBLIC OPTION!!
That is numero uno for anyone that actually is pushing for real reform.. Anyone against the public option has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to health care. Simple as that. You cant have your cake and eat it too.. Sorry Repubs.. But you cant say on one hand that the Government is too big and slow and inefficient.. Then in the very next sentence say that a public option wouldnt be fair to the private insurance companies because the Goverment is too good and efficient and would not allow for the private companies to succeed.. I mean I know the country is dumb.. but come on.
The real reason the republicans dont want a public option is because it absolutely will lower costs and keep the insurance companies honest.. and the insurance companies have lobbied very successfully for a very long time to make sure that doesnt happen..
The public option is not the most important part of health reform and to choose it as the counter-balance to a Republican demand for tort reform is just… silly.
I certainly haven’t become any less of a ‘socialist’, I simply have my priorities straight. There is only one genuine counter-balance for tort reform. If hospitals and HMOs genuinely wish to receive immunity from lawsuits, there is one obvious counterdemand.
Hospitals (and other medical service providers) would have to give up the right to sue (or refuse service to) patients whose insurers refused to pay for their treatment or only covered some part of it. A mechanism for compensation would have to be set up independently of the judicial system similar to the mechanism Ron recommends for tort reform. This would be genuine tort reform, working both ways, to protect doctor, hospital, HMO, and medical consumer.
If both sides give up their right to sue the other, that is real tort reform.
I would prefer language than prevented hospitals or doctors from entering suit against patients at all, but that might not be possible. However, preventing them from suing insured patients whose insurance failed to cover them sufficiently would be a strong first step.
Hi Ron, the point your quote makes about getting an inclusive heath care plan for just $250 or less per year is staggering when you compare it to what most of us pay for insurance every year. Even companies would rejoice at those costs! You bring up some great points on the state of our healthcare.
There is some interesting irony contained in this article. While the US is fighting with blocking Mexican nationals from entering the US for employment, Americans are entering Mexico in search of affordable healthcare. So the reverse migration of people seeking a better life begins.