"The idea is to require the purchase of health insurance, similar to laws enforcing automobile liability insurance. Congress would then subsidize the cost of that insurance, based on income-levels. This would be true for either the so-called “public option” or private insurance.
This is where it gets thorny for Indian Country. Would a treaty right to health care be considered “insurance” under the law? Or would individuals eligible for IHS services be required to purchase insurance under a mandate? And, if so, would the subsidy be automatic or based on income-levels? The result could be some sort of means test.
A working paper
by the staff of Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chairman Byron Dorgan, D-North Dakota, calls for a blanket exemption of individual Indians from this mandate. The paper says: “Exempt Indian tribes from any employer mandate penalties and individual Indians from individual mandate penalties. In recognition of the U.S. federal government’s trust responsibility to provide health care to AI/AN individuals’, financial penalties should not be assessed against individual Indians failing to obtain health insurance coverage.”
On the House side, the pending bills do not spell out protections for the federal trust responsibility. House Natural Resource Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-West Virginia, has proposed a similar amendment to protect the Indian Health system from “inadvertent harm.”"
Get the Story:
It’s a great job (except for the benefits)
(Mark Trahant 8/24)
Related Stories:Mark Trahant: Ideas for health care reform
(8/17) Mark Trahant: Duality in
Indian health care
(8/10) Mark Trahant:
Health care from a different view
(8/4) Mark Trahant: Indian businesses and health care
(7/28) Mark Trahant: First Americans are
last in health
(7/21) Mark Trahant:
Getting into Indian health reform
(7/14) Mark Trahant: Lessons from Indian Country health
(7/10) Mark Trahant: IHS isn't broken,
(7/9) Mark Trahant:
Indian health care at the local level