Taking a New Look at Catastrophic Coverage

Published in the Money & Business section of the New York Times on
January 21, 2001

To the Editor:

Fred Brock is right on the money in suggesting that the country should revisit the ideas, first proposed in the 1970's, of catastrophic health coverage ("Insurance for the Early Retiree," Seniority, Jan. 7).

Catastrophic insurance, in which the government pays all medical costs above a high deductible and lets insurers sell policies to cover the deductible portion, has advantages. It helps retirees too young for Medicare; it could also bring effective and affordable coverage to the millions of working families who don't get health benefits through an employer. Because "catastrophic" is a relative term, however, deductibles should be based on family income.

Our research with government data shows that universal catastrophic coverage for the under-65 population, financed with refundable tax credits for those earning up to $40,000 a year, could be provided with the current budget for publicly financed health care expenditures.

Such an approach would leverage government resources and minimize insurance company interference in routine care.

Thomas Campbell Jackson
Institute for SocioEconomic Studies
White Plains, NY