Recent efforts by various groups to shift the U.S. health care system
to one that provides health coverage for all should be of vital concern
to African Americans, other racial and ethnic minorities, and lower
income families. After all, it is in the area of healthcare where
we can clearly see evidence of the “separate and unequal” philosophy
still at work.
Although only 29 percent of the U.S. population, African Americans,
Hispanics and Asian Americans were a majority (52 percent) of the nation’s
45 million individuals who were uninsured year-round in 2003. In that
same year, 20 percent of African Americans, 33 percent of Hispanics,
and 19 percent of Asians were without health insurance year round compared
to 11 percent of Whites. In 2003, 24 percent of those in households
that made less than $25,000 were uninsured compared to 8 percent of
those in households making more than $75,000.
Health disparity statistics reinforce that lives are unnecessarily
cut short each year largely due to preventable chronic diseases. According
to the National Center for Health Statistics, the age-adjusted death
rate for African Americans was higher than that of whites by 41 percent
for stroke, 30 percent for heart disease, 25 percent for cancer, and
more than 750 percent for HIV disease in 2002.
It could be tempting to place the blame for these disparities squarely
within the realm of personal responsibility, since many of these death-inducing
chronic conditions are exacerbated by the common condition of overweight
and obesity. Yet, there is ample evidence to suggest that personal
behaviors cannot fully explain why the low-income, African Americans
and other racial and ethnic minorities end up with the short end of
the health stick.
Printer friendly version of
the Healthcare is a Human Right cartoon
Structural Bias in the U.S. Health Insurance System
The U.S. health insurance system is largely employer-based, meaning
that the quality of health insurance one receives or whether health
insurance is received at all is primarily dependent upon the type of
employer an individual has. According to the Census Bureau, 60 percent
of non-elderly Americans were covered by health insurance related to
employment in 2003. Yet within this group, a recent article in Health
Affairs reported that 70 percent of whites received health insurance
through their employer compared to only 49 percent of African Americans
and 41 percent of Hispanics.
Conversely, the government is the second largest provider of health
insurance, providing coverage for 27 percent of Americans through Medicaid,
Medicare, and military health care. Yet of those 65 and under in this
group, it is low-income racial and ethnic minorities that are most
heavily reliant on government plans. Twenty five percent and 21 percent
of African Americans and Hispanics respectively received Medicaid as
their source of health insurance coverage in 2003 compared to only
9 percent of Whites.
From employer-based to government-provided health coverage, racial
and ethnic minority populations are ill served by the current structure
of the U.S. health care system. According to the U.S. Census Bureau,
the likelihood of employer provided health coverage increases if an
individual is a high wage earner, employed full time, and/or works
in certain business sectors known for providing coverage such as the
financial services industry.
Put another way, it can also be said that structural racism, ethnocentrism
and classism are inherent in the U.S. employer-based health care system
since it stacks the deck heavily in favor of higher income, better
educated individuals who are able to get and hold on to the white-collar
or union protected full-time jobs that are most likely to provide their
employees with quality health coverage.
Indeed, the data shows that racial and ethnic minorities have higher
unemployment rates, are more likely to work in part-time jobs, and/or
are in those sectors that are not prone to provide health coverage
such at the construction, service, and wholesale and retail trade industries. As
a result of this labor market conundrum (which is also a function of
where you grew up and what type of education you received), racial
and ethnic minorities comprise a majority of the nation’s year round
uninsured, meaning that they are unable to afford access to a doctor
either for regular check ups or for emergency care services. The combined
effect of this lack of access contributes to their poorer health status
and higher rates of disability and early death.
Unfortunately, a 2003 study by the National Institutes of Medicine
found that minorities were more likely to receive a poorer quality
of care even when they had the same level of health insurance access
as Whites. The report concluded that this could be a result of stereotyping
and bias as well as the negative effects of financial and institutional
health system arrangements.
On the flip side of the coin, racial and ethnic minorities disproportionately
benefit from Medicaid. But as a health insurance coverage program
of last resort for those who are very poor, the quality of care Medicaid
provides is compromised because services are limited in scope, providers
often do not accept its patients due to low reimbursement rates, and
benefit levels and the number of people served are subject to be cut
at the whim of policymakers seeking to close federal and state budget
deficits.
To make matters worse, a new study from the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities demonstrates that adult Medicaid beneficiaries spend more
than three times as much of their income on out-of-pocket health care
costs than do middle class adults with private health insurance. So,
those who are least able to afford it pay more: go figure.
Towards a New HealthCare Paradigm
Where can vulnerable populations turn to help them escape the current
trap called the U.S. health care system? Ironically, these groups
could actually benefit from the health care crisis currently brewing. Skyrocketing
health care costs, growing concern about health care quality, and the
increasing number of uninsured are taking a heavy financial toll on
employers, hospitals, providers, state and federal governments, and
American families.
In their desperate attempt to save corporate profit margins, small
and large businesses are cutting back on health care benefits and some
are also joining with nontraditional allies to seek new ways of insuring
the American public. It is becoming increasingly clear to many that
traditionally championed coverage measures, such as ad hoc efforts
to enhance smaller employers’ ability to provide coverage and the provision
of health insurance tax credits for unemployed individuals, are not
sufficient for offsetting the magnitude or nature of the uninsured
problem in America. A total paradigm shift is now necessary in the
way U.S. health care is financed and administered.
Throughout the years there have been a number of legislative initiatives
and studies calling for universal health care. The effort with the
highest recent profile was led by then First Lady Hillary Clinton circa
1994. Since that time legislators have introduced bills such as the “Health
Security for All Americans” Act (H.R. 2133) and the “United States
Health Insurance Act” Act (H.R. 676), offered by Rep. Tammy Baldwin
and Rep. John Conyers respectively, which call for quality health coverage
for all. Within the past month, two additional voices have joined
the chorus with the release of separate reports by the National Coalition
on Health Care and The Century Foundation detailing proposals for structuring
a universal health plan for America.
Civil Rights groups and other concerned organizations must begin to
add their voices to this debate so as to address the factors that cause
us to have less access and poorer health outcomes. Measures that should
be embraced by these groups include: pursuing aggressive minority
health worker recruitment efforts, de-linking health insurance from
employment, encouraging physician diversity training and expanded data
collection based on race, income, and other important variables, and
providing administrative incentives for the promotion of equal health
outcomes among other valid proposals.
Conclusion
Ultimately, we must all be concerned about improving the health care
system as current inefficiencies are costing the country dearly not
only in terms of higher costs for low quality health care services,
but also in terms of lost productivity and wages and increased social
insurance and welfare costs due to poor health, disability and higher
mortality rates experienced by American workers who lack consistent
access to quality care.
Of course, this issue also has a direct impact on the Social Security
debate since improving health care for all will increase life expectancies
for African Americans and others who are presently more likely to die
before receiving retirement benefits.
For a new generation of Americans who believe that there are no civil
rights issues left to be addressed: think again. A lack of access
to quality health care is one of the biggest and most egregious civil
rights issues of our time and it is hidden in plain view.
Maya Rockeymoore, PhD., is of Research and Programs at the Congressional
Black Caucus Foundation. She is the author of The
Political Action Handbook: A How To Guide for the Hip Hop Generation and
co-editor of Strengthening Communities: Social
Insurance in a Diverse America.