Single-Payer Health Plan Not Good for State

California’s legislators have passed our very own single-payer health plan at an estimated cost of $400 billion annually, and they don’t know how they’re going to pay for it. Am I crazy? Should I be concerned? What’s a higher sales or consumption tax going to do to our local economy overall?Should I worry that our track record of government controlled healthcare—the VA Medical System— is in dismal shape and so, to be democratic, a single-payer plan will allow the government to fail us all?

The only way to have an ethically viable and economically realistic healthcare system in our state would be to make sure that any healthcare law:

  1. Applies also to our lawmakers and does not allow them special coverage.
  2. Allows taxpaying California citizens and legal residents a tax deduction/credit for their health insurance premium.
  3. Allows tax-paying citizens and legal residents who pay state taxes to opt out with their own health savings accounts.
  4. Allows healthcare providers a tax deduction/credit for any charity healthcare they provide, as charity cases are inevitable and necessary.
  5. Provides that patients receive truth-in-pricing, so we know the actual costs of goods and services prior to purchase in nonemergency situations.

The proposed single-payer health plan requires money spent that the state doesn’t have on behalf of “all” Californians. This indicates a (democratic?) mission to redistribute wealth and/or force middle-class citizens out of state. How am I wrong? Local college graduates with good jobs have either moved home or across state lines because they don’t qualify for a federal housing subsidy but still can’t afford local rents (let alone house payments). And now, what’s a proposed sales tax hike for healthcare going to accomplish?

More residents and businesses moving out of state? Can California afford that?

I don’t see a nanny state and single-payer healthcare system working in the long-run.

Heather Hodge Kolodny
Thousand Oaks