by Brian Leubitz [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

Field released a poll on the California healthcare siuation. PDF available here. It focuses on the failed plan from the Governor and Speaker last year.  That's all well and good, and I respect Field enormously, but how can you release a poll without asking a question about single payer? I understand this is a highly complicated question that is tough to explain within a few sentences for a poll, but why is it that we can't get a decent poll in the state on single payer?

The results of the actual questions are quite interesting, and indicate a real consensus for reform, but it seems the policy details are still murky for many Californians.  Some bright points on said consensus include the series questions asking about proposed reforms. Specifically, 74% of Californians favor requiring health insurance companies to offer coverage to everyone without regard to their health condition and 77% favor providing state subsidized health insurance to low income adults.  Of course, there is a bit of interpretation in that last question, as that could just indicate support of Medi-Cal if the question is not clear. 

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Rose Ann DeMoro
Executive Director
California Nurses Association

With its vote today, the Senate Health Committee deserves the thanks for all Californians for its thorough, deliberative process and for taking a principled courageous stand despite the enormous pressure brought to bear by those who were pushing for hurried passage for a badly flawed healthcare bill

Following this vote, the nurses of California offer our pledge to work with legislators, community groups, and labor for genuine healthcare reform that avoids the serious shortcomings of AB x 1.

AB x 1 was rejected not because Californians and the legislature like the status quo or do not yearn for fixing our broken healthcare system. The bill collapsed because it was fundamentally flawed on its merits on access, quality, and cost.

Among our key concerns were the mandate forcing individuals to purchase insurance with no controls on costs or a minimum standard for benefits or quality, the failure to provide meaningful protection to families facing a huge spike in out-of-pocket costs, and the danger that the low employer mandate would encourage employers to drop current coverage.

by Lucas O'Connor [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

• Agreement between Governor Schwarzenegger and Speaker Nunez passes 46-31
• Proposal would extend health coverage to nearly 4 of 5 million uninsured Californians
• Would be largest expansion of coverage since the creation of Medicaid and Medicare
• Latest amendments include tax subsidies for families earning up to $82,600 (family of four) to help buy coverage, and for early retirees not yet eligible for Medicare

By Anthony Wright
Executive Director of Health Access California

The California state Assembly Monday, on a 46-31 party line vote, approved an historic expansion of health care, which could ultimately provide health coverage to more than 95 percent of California residents.

“California is taking a giant step forward,’’ said Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, calling the Assembly’s passage of AB x1 1 “courageous.” Schwarzenegger spoke at a news conference flanked by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and a phalanx of Democratic Assembly lawmakers. Also present were “groups who normally are opposed to one another” -- representatives from a broad range of health care interests: from small businesses, large businesses, physicians, labor unions, consumer groups, community of color organizations, hospitals and insurance companies.

by Robert in Monterey [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Anthony Wright
Executive Director of Health Access California

When the special session was announced, both the Speaker and the Senate President made the case that the Governor needed to produce language to negotiate about.

As an advocate, it's been frustrating that the Governor's proposal has not evolved, in detail or in policy, from the 10-page concept paper introduced in January. Health Access' preliminary analysis still applies, ten months later. The lack of movement also stops the conversation: a policy change in one area has implications in other areas that then need to be explored in a new light.

It's also part of negotiations. For years, the Legislature has passed (and Health Access and other consumer groups have supported) reform measures, including an employer mandate, children's coverage, and single-payer, but the Governor said "no." In January, the Governor put forward his proposal, of what he would say "yes" to. It borrowed a lot from the previous proposals, but he combined them together with his own details.

by David Dayen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]