Providing health insurance for each Californians under a plan similar to what Massachusetts recently accepted would cost about $9.4 billion more in this state, according to a study to be released today.
Massachusetts, earlier this month, became the first state that requires individuals to carry health insurance or face financial penalties. The state doesn't expect much new public funding would be needed because it plans to redirect money spent on uncompensated care toward helping low-income people buy insurance.
An analysis by the Institute for Health Policy Solutions found a similar program would cost $9.4 billion more in California, or $1,451 per uninsured resident.
Socioeconomic and demographic differences between the states account for the disparity, the study found. "Our baseline of uninsured is very different and our labor market is very different," said Dr. Mark Smith, president and also the chief executive officer of the California HealthCare Foundation, an Oakland health care philanthropy that commissioned the study.
Employer-paid coverage is also offered more widely in Massachusetts than in this state, partly because California has more low-wage earners. Companies that hire workers at low wage levels are less likely to offer health insurance than other employers.
"All of the numbers are quite imprecise and speculative," Smith said. Massachusetts officials "can tell you exactly what the penalties are, but they can't tell you how much the insurance will cost and what it will cover."
"People should look at what we did in Massachusetts more as a political blueprint and less as a policy blueprint," said John
Regardless of the fate of the Massachusetts system, he said, "It's useful we are having discussion. ...There are too many people who think that health care should be free. Somebody's got to pay for it."