Questions? Call 888-624-8373

HARDBACK
list:$29.95
Web:$26.95
add to cart

PDF BOOK
your price: $23.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Employment and Health Benefits: A Connection at Risk (1993)
Institute of Medicine (IOM)

Page
59
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Employment and Health Benefits: A Connection at Risk

TABLE 2.2 Standards Adapted by American Association for Labor Legislation in 1914 for Drafting Model State Medical Care Insurance Bill

Coverage

• Compulsory participation for workers.

• Voluntary participation for the self-employed.

• Emphasis on illness prevention when possible.

Organization and Operation

• Financing through contributions from employer, employee, and the public.

• Administration by employers and employees under public supervision.

• Separate program of disability insurance to replace lost income.

 

SOURCE: Anderson, 1968.

efit for burial expenses (Starr, 1982). Two-fifths of the cost would come from workers, two-fifths from employers, and one-fifth from state government; the total cost was estimated at 4 percent of wages. The objectives were to reduce the social costs of illness through effective medical care and incentives for disease and injury prevention.

In 1916 the American Medical Association (AMA) established its own Committee on Social Insurance to cooperate with the AALL in studying the issue and drafting legislation (Anderson, 1968; Harris, 1969; Starr, 1982). The group was chaired by Theodore Roosevelt's personal doctor (Alexander Lambert) and staffed by a Socialist physician (I. M. Rubinow). In the same year the AMA elected as its president Dr. Rupert Blue, then surgeon general of the United States. Dr. Blue called for adequate health insurance in his presidential address (Mullan, 1989). Moreover, an AMA trustees' report argued that it was better that they '''initiate the necessary changes than have them forced on us"' (Harris, 1969, p. 5). The AMA Committee on Social Insurance concluded that voluntary health insurance under private control was unworkable and urged support for state legislation.

By 1920, however, the stance of organized medicine switched from cautious cooperation to forceful opposition that lasted decades.8 One explanation is that the academically oriented leadership of the AMA was countered by "grass roots" practitioners who were reacting to the immediate reality of

8  

The American Medical Association now supports legislation that would (1) strengthen Medicaid to ensure "that no poor person is left without access to needed health care," (2) require "employer provision of health insurance for all full-time employees and their families, with tax help to employers," and (3) create state risk pools to cover the medically uninsurable and those who cannot afford or otherwise obtain coverage (Todd et al., 1991, p. 2504). A number of other physician groups have developed their own reform proposals, most of which include some type of required coverage and some public funding.

Page
59