Medicare for All

Mailbag Episode! Spilling the Tea with Ben and Gillian This week Ben and Gillian take questions from YOU, our listeners, and Medicare for All activists around the country. We got some really great questions submitted over the past week, and some very saucy questions as well - well done listeners! Show Notes Question from Susan Udin in NY: "I was in the hospital a few weeks ago for 2 days. I went due to symptoms of stroke (aphasia) on instructions of my doctor's office. When I got home, I discovered a statement in my discharge papers that I hadn't actually been "admitted". I was just there "for observation." Then a few days after that, I got a letter from Highmark, my health care non-provider, that they deemed the stay and the tests not to have been due to an emergency and were thus not going to pay the costs. My questions: Who profits from such non-admissions? Can Highmark get away with not paying? Are the hospital and Highmark in cahoots?" ANSWER: Many insurance companies deny a huge percentage of hospital admissions; they are the ones profiting in this case. The hospital is actually the loser in this scenario; this denial means they're not getting paid. You do have the right to appeal. (Additional detail from your friendly show notes writer: observation status can be especially problematic those covered by Medicare.) Question from someone in MN: "I am disabled and I have Medicare. I also need to have supplemental health insurance and prescription drug coverage. The total cost for Medicare and my other healthcare coverage is over $7,000 a year. My gross annual income is $20,000. It is very hard to live on what is left of my income after paying for Medicare and the supplemental insurance and prescription co-pays I have. Medicare is not good insurance unless you are very healthy or have a sizable income. As it is now, I don’t think Medicare for all would be a good deal for most Americans. It sure is not a good deal for me!" ANSWER: the Medicare for All bill doesn't just extend Medicare as it currently exists to all Americans. It expands the benefits and fills in all the gaps mentioned in the question. No premiums, no or very small co-pays. The person asking the question wouldn't be paying $7,000 a year for Medicare under the bill we're supporting. We want to make Medicare better and expand it to everyone. Two questions about protecting Medicare for All: Question from Jan in CO: "How can we convince the public that Medicare For All will be different and not fall into the hands of the political party currently in office who would like nothing better than to prove how wrong it is for the government to make the rules around healthcare?  I've heard that services would be determined by a board of experts and patient advocates, not politicians; but who would be responsible for appointing these experts on the board and who would be selected as a patient advocate?   I love and advocate for M4A, but am having the same worries about politicians owned by special interests on both sides of the aisle.” Question from James in IL: "Will M4A be such that members of Congress and their families will have the same coverage as me and my family such that they will make it be the best that it can possibly be?  Will there be any people in charge of it (like CMS) that can distort it like CMS does now?  Can M4A be kept free of corruption, confusion, and consternation?" ANSWER: If you look at the other countries with universal healthcare, there are often attempts to undermine and privatize their systems. It is a constant fight for all of them to maintain or expand their public systems. While we wish that passing the bill would mean we could retire from healthcare activism, we will have to keep fighting. The good news is that it's far easier to preserve an existing program with hundreds of millions of recipients than it is to win a whole new system. Once the system is in place,