Halfway to Universal Health Care

Today is an historic milestone for the 46 million Americans who don't have health insurance.

At the National Press Club, I just announced that San Francisco has enrolled 30,061 residents into the city's ground-breaking Healthy San Francisco universal health care program, more than half of the estimated 60,000 uninsured residents that the program hopes to serve. This comes just 15 months after the initial launch of the program.

By thinking outside-the-box, San Francisco has provided innovative solutions that can help solve our national health crisis rather than passing the buck. We are proving that it can be done.

San Francisco did not wait for politicians in Washington, DC or Sacramento to come to a consensus. We moved forward, because providing health care access to all our residents is the right thing to do for our city, the nation and our economy.

Healthy San Francisco is designed to make health care services accessible and affordable to uninsured San Francisco residents. It is operated by the San Francisco Department of Public Health (DPH). It provides a Medical Home and primary physician to each program participant, allowing a greater focus on preventive care, as well as specialty care, urgent and emergency care, laboratory, inpatient hospitalization, radiology, and pharmaceuticals.

The program is a public/non-profit partnership. The current Healthy San Francisco primary care provider network consists of 28 different primary care medical homes (14 public health centers, 14 non-profit health centers) and an independent private physician's group (2 clinics and multiple providers) and an associated hospital.

Hospital services are provided at San Francisco General Hospital (hospital, pharmacy, specialty and diagnostic services) and at four additional San Francisco hospitals. In all four cases, the hospitals that are providing services to HSF, are participating without reimbursement. Mental health and substance abuse services are provided by the Department of Public Health's Community Behavioral Health Services division.

In 2005, I pledged to provide universal health care access to the city's uninsured residents and three years later we are halfway there. Healthy San Francisco is a program that can be duplicated across the country if our elected officials are willing to take risks instead of continuing the status quo.

Follow Gavin Newsom on Twitter: www.twitter.com/GavinNewsom

Comments

[Sassysam]

Gavin,
Let's go back in history a minute and recall a few things. Like that fact that you OPPOSED Healthy San Francisco initially and only got on board when it was unfunded. And then Supervisor Tom Ammiano had to fight to make sure there was a funding mechanism.

[Independent-for-Obama]

This is a slight improvement on the "delay until dying" emergency room treatment as it does encourage earlier health care when it might be less expensive and more beneficial to the indigent ill.

Even "universal" health care doesn't guarantee universal coverage. My wife suffered and died from cancer, which is debilitating enough but she was devastated by the secondary caused lymphedema. This is why a memorial charity fund, the Marilyn Westbrook Garment Fund, has been started in her memory and name. Please check out

http://www.lymphnet.org/patients/westbrookFund.htm

and contribute to this worthy cause if you have the means.

[Raspathway]

Having health care providers not be reimbursed for the work they do is not a sustainabel option. You know, you could cure hunger if you could just get grocers to not be reimbursed for the food hungry people need. Of cousre, everyone would say that's rediculous.

[bannorhill]

Welvcome to the socialist City of San Francisco!!!!

[lukebenward]

Unless you guys considering adopting the Canadian way of universal health care, you'll never fully "get it" (double meaning). I'm glad I got O.H.I.P. and my O.H.I.P. card.

[adl]

So, how are these hospitals going to survive if they are providing service without reimbursement?

[janfernandez]

We all pay for it one way or another. When people go to the ER for their primary care needs and they do not have insurance, we all pay for it. The hospital charges more to the ones that can pay and ultimately their insurance companies of which we pay the premiums. Even if your employer covers you there is still some responsibility on your part. There are so many people who have no insurance coverage that are seen by their local ERs whether it is an emergency or not. Hospitals have to have some bad debt but there is so much that the hospitals do that the public is not aware of. Also, there are funds from the state or feds that sometimes apply. Also, once a hospital takes you in there is a question of continuity of care and they are obligated to follow through on your care. I hope that none of you are ever put in a position to really need medical care and can't get it because you have no insurance and you make too much money to qualify for assistance.

[Bladernr1001]

Sounds like more smoke and mirrors to me....how did you say it was getting paid for?....Oh­, you didn't.

Actually an earlier poster pointed out that surcharges to restaurant bills and probably higher hotel tax (if it is not already high enough) will pay for this.

Does not sound very ground breaking or repeatable to me.

When you declare something like this a "right"...­..taxpayer­s, hold on to your wallets.

[johnfoirdfw]

Hold on to your wallet for Bear Stearns and Freddie or Fannie? Or hold on for our fellow citizens? I go with my neighbor. We used to have a tradition of Christian charity in this country...­Trickle Down, The RTC and the current bailout sound more like smoke and mirrors to me.

[Bladernr1001]

Then let the churches handle it.

I am with you on one thing. Government should not transfer wealth to business and more than it should individuals. It is corrupting all the same.

[VikingQuest]

It's called really high taxes and a $400 million dollar budget deficit . . . for just the city.

[MeanGreenMachine]

Then DON'T move here.

[MeanGreenMachine]

San Francisco is "the fourth most populous city in California and the 14th most populous city in the United States, with a 2007 estimated population of 764,976"*

Alaska? 683,478 (2007 est.)**

You may need to develop a sense of proportion, silly girl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//San_francisco
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/i/Alaska

[MeanGreenMachine]

"$229 million budget deficit"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/17/MNH5UGGA7.DTL

[lolyla]

I am reminded of the comic who said that you're required to have car insurance, but not health insurance. If you get sick, don't go to the hospital--drive into the emergency room. I was hit by a semi-tractor trailer about two years ago and had a chiropractor calling ME every week to ensure I would come in for an appointment. Having never been in a crash before, I didn't quite understand what was going on until my $10,000 PIP was exhausted and couldn't get another appointment even if I paid out of pocket.

My catastrophic accident/c­ancer/preg­nancy plan is buying a plane ticket to England. It's the cheapest alternative.

[Bladernr1001]

Have fun Paul.

[Bruce Tenenbaum - Huffpost Blogger]

It's a start and you are to be commended for making the effort. It's shocking to me that heath care is not at the forefront this campaign season. One has to wonder when, if ever, Americans will put their health above all other concerns.

I do have some questions about the plan. Did I read correctly that hospitals are not getting reimbursed for their services? How is that going to work?

Also, having followed your link, I noticed that the primary objective of this plan is to cover people who are living in poverty. Certainly, this is a concern to all but one of the things about Universal Health Care that are most misunderstood is that being able to afford health care is not the only issue. People who CAN afford health care need to be guaranteed access. That is, even wealthier people need to be freed from the concerns of pre-existing conditions and the possibility that their insurer will deny them coverage for a procedure their doctor deems necessary.

Again, thanks for making inroads on this issue. Either you need to have a conversation with the mayor of Los Angeles or I may have to consider moving to San Francisco.

[yankeefoerever]

Too bad that the healthcare comes off the backs or visitors and residents of San Francisco. Most restaurants are charging a surcharge between 2% to 6% of your total bill to cover socialized medical care in San Fran.

I love the city, I travel there monthly for work but it needs a major overhaul.

[Bladernr1001]

As long as touchy, feely social programs get more votes for pols than fixing potholes. Forget about infrastrcuture improvements. Government at all levels has been redirecting infrastructure funds for 50 years now.

That is why some of these some posters have politiced for more spending on roads ever since the bridge collapse in MN. But none of them ever connect the dots on why we really have an infrastructure problem.

What do you want people? Smooth roads or healthcare for all. You are not going to get both.....i­ts just too expensive.

[Dangersea27]

Especially when the wars in Afganistan and Iraq are costing 350 million per month.

What do you want people? American Imperialism or healthcare for all. You are not going to get both....it­s just too expensive.

Open your eyes. Open you ears. Open your mind, for cheese sake!

[timezone]

Wow, smooooth roads orrrrr healthcare? Those are the two choices? Not cutting down on waste and greed in government, holding politicians accountable. A lot of big corporations are making ALOT of money on the war and we seem to be writing them a blank check. But you think it's between smooth road and healthcare. Interesting.

[timezone]

Bottomline: All people should have health care available, not just those who can afford it. The U.S. prides itself on helping those in Third World countries get health care and I APPLAUD that effort, but we should also take care of those in the U.S.

[Bladernr1001]

And isn't funny that no matter how much of our money is poured into these countries the problem just never seems to go away.

OK, so you want health care fo all. What existing government programs shall we eliminate in order to pay for that? Oh yea, no need for prioritizi­ng.....all we need to do is raise taxes.

[ZekeCDN]

Q: What programs should be eliminated to pay for universal health care?

A: The Iraq War.

Next fallacy?

[minerva117]

How about we take the hundreds of billions that are lining the pockets of the "for profit" health insurance industry fat cats and redirect into a medicare for all program. Does it NOT piss you off that the dollars you send to your health care insurer are spent to find ways to deny you coverage? And for big fat bonuses for those fat cats who find the most efficient way to make you pay for your own health care? They've even spent those dollars to convince you that there is no better way to dispense health care. And you fell for it!

[mommamia526]

The AMA has come up with its very own plan, see it @ VoicefortheUninsured.com read it and comment on it to them. I am not for that plan. My main objective against those plans which leave all the power to insurers without restrictions and regulations is that one will be prevented from employment. If you have hypertension, or diabetes, or a number of other chronic illnesses and you are stabilized and using medication this should not prevent you from being employed, paying taxes, paying healthcare insurance, and participating in life. If you belong to a group of persons where there are congential illnesses, possibly, such as sickle cell anemia for blacks, eleven different genetic diseases for some people of Eastern European descent, you can be refused both employment AND healthcare insurance, even if you ar NOT personally affected or ill under the current system. We want people to work and contribute, to be covered and not be stolen from. It costs us all less in taxes, in our own healthcare costs, and in societal cost.

[SailFree]

There are no "insurers" any more. We cannot obtain insurance, which is the pooling of risk against catastrophic occurrence. Instead, what is out there is pre-paid health care, which by its very structure encourages demand and increases cost.

[SailFree]

Back in prehistoric days, Blue Cross DID sell insurance, which was relatively cheap. Everybody bought it, the cost was reasonable, and if you needed to go to the hospital, they paid the bill! It was INSURANCE against catastrophic occurrence, just like automobile insurance.

Imagine if your auto "insurance" was no longer insurance but pre-paid car care. Oil changes, car washes, fixing tiny nicks in the paint, waxing, rotating the tires, putting air in the tires, every little bitty thing was "covered" by your "insurance­." Do you not think the demand for car washes and tire rotations would rise exponentially? Do you not think the cost of your car "insurance" would skyrocket? Please, just grasp reality.

[HHarvey]

Gavin, I hope you are running for Governor next year. You have my vote!

[VikingQuest]

All you have to do is give away a bunch of free stuff and run up a $400 million dollar deficit to win yuor support?

[Primadonna]

We love your true leadership Gavin Newsom ...

[SailFree]

Does true leadership then mean that one promises more than one can pay for and hopes that some day the city will be bailed out? Raising taxes to drive out the productive? The young people appear to be fleeing the high-tax cities and states and settling in--EEK! HORRORS!--RED STATES.

[MeanGreenMachine]

We are and have ALWAYS been the vanguard.

[MeanGreenMachine]

California is THE GREATEST STATE in the U.S.

The only folks that leave are those who can't compete.

Patriots pay taxes. Only children cry when forced to share.