Share
Email This Page
add comment

Job Numbers Makes Health Care Reform a Necessity

Print
06 March 2010
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)



Why the Continuing Bad Job Numbers Make It Harder (But Even More Important) to Pass Health Care Reform

he loss of 36,000 jobs in February is better than expected but it's still miserable. 26,000 were lost in January, according to the government's revised figures. And the "underemployment" rate - including jobless workers who have given up looking for work and part-time workers who want full time jobs - rose from 16.5% in January to 16.8% in February, offsetting some of January's gains.

(And don't blame it mostly on the weather. Although the surveys on which the report is based were done in mid-February during winter snowstorms in the east, the major impact of bad weather was on hours worked, not the numbers of jobs. If you had a job in February but were snowed in, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported you as having a job.)

This complicates the President's final push for health care reform. With employers still shedding jobs and consumer confidence down, Americans are worried first and foremost about paying their bills. Because most people aren't aware how much of their paychecks are being eaten up by rising health care costs but can easily be persuaded they'll be paying more to cover those who don't have health insurance under any new health plan, the continuing bad news on the jobs front makes it harder for the President to make his health-care sale.

The bad news on jobs also allows economic illiterates (and scoundrels who know better) to continue to claim the stimulus is failing and what's needed is less government rather than more, including not only a smaller "jobs bill" but less or no health care reform.

In politics as in economics and love, timing is everything. Obama can't wait much longer if he wants to convince waivering and worried conservative Dems to join him in a last ditch 51-vote reconciliation measure to get health care through the Senate. We're already in the gravititational pull of November's mid-term elections. But the economy is taking a longer time to turn around than anyone expected, and telling Americans the jobs numbers are getting worse more slowly isn't exactly reassuring.

One small political consolation is the worst job numbers continue to be on the coasts and the old rust belt where Dems are relatively safer, and the best numbers in the midwest and mountain states and south where Dems are weakest. So at least blue-dog Dems who are under the most pressure from their conservative constituents on health care aren't grappling with the biggest job losses.

Another is that all across the nation, the people being hit worst by this continuing jobs recession/depression are poor and the lower-middle class who Republicans are trying to court. They're in greatest danger of losing health care coverage if they haven't lost it already, and in greatest need for subsidies to allow them and their families to afford it. Waivering and worried congressional Dems should be reaching out to them.

Americans desperately need health care reform. They also desperately need jobs. Even if it's difficult for many to make the connection, it's still possible for the nation to try to do two important things at the same time. We need a big jobs bill - including especially extended unemployment insurance, aid to hard-hit states and cities - and we need health care reform. The sooner we do the former and get the economy moving into positive job numbers again, the more quickly and easily we can afford the latter. The big question is whether the President can make the case.


Open Article On Originating Site

Robert Reich is Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written twelve books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," and his most recent book, "Supercapitalism." His "Marketplace" commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.

 

Comments  

 
+7 # jordan bishop 2010-03-06 11:06
A single payer system (which of course is not in the cards) would probably cost a great many jobs, since the biggest difference between (say) Canada and the US is that Canadian administration costs are much lower. In the US hospital billing departments must employ people to deal with 1500 insurers. Insurers have enormous internal bureaucracies.
On the other hand, with a single-payer more money might actually be spent on healthcare.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+6 # jlohman 2010-03-06 13:39
Quoting jordan bishop:
A single payer system ... would probably cost a great many jobs,


Not so. For every job in the insurance industry lost, two higher-paying jobs will be created in health care.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+10 # tanya 2010-03-06 13:41
your anticipation of lost jobs with single payer is wrong. the numbers were crunched eons ago. those to lose are the top administrators but they wont in reality. most of the other workers will, or can be retrained to work in other aspects of the single payer system. you will still need accountants and people who manage the billing. further, if there is a real commitment to green energy, the field is ready for many to receive training.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+19 # Johnathan Mann 2010-03-06 11:31
An Idea to Help Balance the Budget!

There are 2.6 trillion stock transactions per year in the USA. If there were a ONE DOLLAR FEE on every transaction, that would create an extra 2.6 TRILLION DOLLARS for our BUDGET. It would only cost an individual who bought or sold stocks 1 extra dollar each time they executed a stock order. We could call it
“A CHARGE TO REBUILD AMERICA.”
Can you think of a reason this wouldn't work?" Can you think of a way to make it work?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+14 # Robert Uttaro 2010-03-06 12:34
I would like to add another approach to supplement yours: Everyday $1.5 trillion in currency transactions take place. I suggest a 0.01 percent tax on those transactions to pay the cost of funding a public option or better still, Medicare for Everyone. We should also have a consumption tax for a set period of time (say 5 years) to pay down the debt to something manageable. Nobody could touch these funds - they would go strictly to debt pay down. And to keep our conservative friends from going ballistic, Congress could not have a new program unless it is paid for by new taxes or program cuts (we could start with the waste in the Pentagon but also by adopting a Constitutional Amendment that makes all elections publicly funded. Result:no more quid pro quo to corporations and no bid-contracts to political donors.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+4 # Kimberly Kay King 2010-03-07 11:52
Mr. Uttaro!

That's a couple of the most creative and sensible ideas I've heard in a long time!
Run for office!

Kimberly Kay King, Poulsbo Washington 98370
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+2 # Jeff Redman 2010-03-07 20:31
IMHO the currency transaction tax is worth considering, but have yet to get passed the instant revulsion stage when it comes to consumption taxes. One huge reason... they are inherently regressive. People who make so little the must spend their entire income get taxed on 100% of their income. People who have big incomes are taxed on only a part of their income.

The only potentially valid argument for a consumption tax I can see is the assumption that the unspent/untaxed portion of income will result in capital formation (may be true, tho' I am not convinced this is so at this time) AND that the capital formed will be used exclusively to create jobs IN THIS COUNTRY. IMO if untaxed income does not actually create jobs in this country, it should be taxed.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+10 # Gail Griffith 2010-03-06 12:58
Has this idea been given serious consideration by anyone in Congress? If a bill were introduced, it might get some grassroots organizations like MoveOn to promote it. I doubt that it would ever get out of committee if it didn't have lots of co-sponsors.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+17 # jlohman 2010-03-06 11:42
It never ceases to amaze me, the amount of energy that can go into a project just to avoid doing the right thing. The best, simplest, least costly, most effective thing we could do is expand what has been working so well for years, Medicare. You get sick, you get care, and the caregiver gets paid. Nothing could be simpler. But follow the money and you’ll find why the politicians don’t like it a bit. They get their money from insurance interests.

"America will always do the right thing, but only after everything else fails." Winston Churchill
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+13 # MaryElizabeth 2010-03-06 11:56
Why has it taken so long to get this message out? Many many moons ago jobs and health care reform were linked but somehow people became wary of the interconnection . Jobs and health care costs are intimately linked. Why are we so blind? Thanks Robert Reich --- lets keep this message going wide, loud and strong! Let's get Obama to address the interconnection !
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+9 # Rita Ague 2010-03-06 12:46
A robust public option at a minimum (Medicare for all with public option in supplemental plans is best) is absolutely essential. Let's see who the Dems. are who will not vote in favor of this type of option in budget reconciliation. Then, we can vote them out. We do not need to make insurance corp. greed and power players richer...
NO SHAM REFORMS FOR HEALTH CARE!!!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+2 # heraldmage 2010-03-07 11:55
The only way we will ever get a single payer system or any legislation that doesn't benefit foreign or corporate interest is change. Instead of voting for either political party vote for independent candidate. If your state doesn't have recall legislation get it. Then use it to return politician home any time they stray from our mission. The 1st thing that must happen is public funding of political campaigns removing the power of PAC's. The 2nd is freeing the news from gov't & corporate interpretation of events. The air waves are owned by the people. Corporate media uses it for free & profit. The news needs to be separated from general programming without sponsors & no censorship. Programs that discuss event must be labeled as commentary, opinion, during the entire program or discussion so people can easily identify facts from opinion. Political advertizing must be based on fact& give reference for data or accusation. This wuld be a good start on system reform, people in control.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+10 # Barbara Hodges 2010-03-06 13:55
Please America contact your congressman/woman and tell them to pass not scratch the Health Care... I am in debt up to my neck because of illnesses please know that the people that are holding this up is being paid by the rich and insurance companies. Please email them and blog them the time is now
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+10 # Connie 2010-03-06 14:37
Much of the hospital billing is automated since HIPPAA required all Medicare and Medicaid transactions to electronically processed in Ansi X.12 format. The Blues jumped on that requirement almost immediately. The larger facilities already have the electronic billing in place. Much of the work to convert paper bills to the electronic format is done offshore anyway. (Print images are either emailed or faxed to a consolidator who creates the bills using offshore cheap labor, something I have railed against for years since it is identity theft heaven. If most people knew that someone making 10 cents a day was handling their most sensitive information --employer, social, family members, religion, address, phones, doctors, etc. all in a single place for the harvesting-- they would not be so quick as to dismiss single payer which would eliminate this offshore industry.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
-4 # NoelEljr@gMail.Com 2010-03-06 21:05
Am surprised to find someone of Secretary REICHs usual probity hustling the likes of ObamaCare.Should this flawed and highly
unpopular scheme (cf: March 6 SNL skit) be enacted into law, it may doom a promising and historic Presidency. Too bad.
s/NeP Jr eMail: NoelJr@OptOnlin e.Net
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+2 # Jeff Redman 2010-03-07 20:34
There is not such thing as "Obamacare." He did not write the bills. "Obamacare" is a phrase without meaning being used to fool the rubes into fighting against their own interests.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+2 # Scott Cr 2010-03-07 04:30
Thanks, Mr. Secretary, for an article inspiring some confidence in President Obama, for whom I campaigned, and am happy for having done it. Clearly, and regardless of alleged current admstrn shortcomings, this President was shafted with -$20 Trillion average of public and private sector static capital debt, 11/2008. Static or not (some Keynesian retro-amortization accelerated GDP possibility, though limited at these (-) levels), that is a formidable mt. to climb. The banker/planter party still insists on dievesting [sic] the US and the West, compelling USA DoD deployment overseas to secure the hyper equity/earnings divergence event risk manifestation negative conflict ensuing therein from Western dievestment [sic] banking (-), anti-American policy. Massive profiting on exigent survival necessities: food, shelter, medical care, and energy via lever on crude fulcrum and nominal market machination, rather than building new real economy fulcrum, is subversive. Make money; don't take.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+5 # heraldmage 2010-03-07 11:26
We need health care reform but not the current legislation it is a gift to the insurance companies, as was Medicare. Medicare removed high risk populations from insurance rolls leaving the young, healthly & millions in profit. If Medicare was available to all & they paid the curreb premium, Medicare could be profitable. If it is necessary for program changes to be budget neutral, take it from DOD & foreign Affairs. These budgets are used to bribe foreign officials & covert activities aimed @ destabilizing gov'ts that don't bend to USA wishes or follow it's economic policy. The millitary's not protecting USA, instead it is used to protect corporate interest. The USA atitude we can do anything, anytime, anywhere& attack, invade & occupy anyone continues to creating animosity. It's time we started taking care of USA population. Stop the undue influence of foreign gov't,corporations & wealthy in the affairs of the people. End Trinkle Down Economic it doesn't work maintains feudal system
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote