Health care and the Michigan Difference

With the national healthcare debate continuing throughout the fall, the Independent set out on a quest to find the personal stories that exemplify the state of health care on campus. Our expectation was to find that the University of Michigan’s health care system was fundamentally corrupt, and that every person affiliated with the university would personally benefit from a public healthcare option.

On the contrary, though there are indeed minor flaws in this system, U of M’s healthcare is not only decent and competitive, but more or less fair. And, incidentally, it operates on the same principal that powers the public option that Congress is currently debating in its committees.

The University requires all employees, including graduate students instructors (GSIs) and researchers, to have health insurance, and provides an accessible and affordable program. Although faculty and staff do pay a yearly premium that varies by package, the most basic plan for graduate students is free-of-charge and non-student employees pay a low annual price. These premiums are minimal due to the size and demographic of the customer pool. The bigger the pool, the lower the percentage of risky or expensive customers, and therefore the less expensive the plan.

“Most 35 year olds are very healthy. That’s why we get free health care. It’s cheaper [for the University] to buy into GradCare,” said Patrick O’Mahen, a GSI in the department of political science.

President Obama’s proposed public plan would operate on the same principle. If the 46 million currently uninsured Americans went into his proposed public exchange, the pool would be enormous, making the percentage of people who require expensive medical services very low. Thus, costs throughout the system would be defused and premiums would also be minimal.

“If you look at any proposal going through Congress, the ones with the best government options save the government more money,” O’Mahen said.

This isn’t to say that U of M health care is perfect and should be emulated exactly. Though its premiums are low, some grad students, especially those who suffer from more complicated health problems, note that the services provided are nowhere near sufficient.

“Healthcare is there for people who are sick, and most of us are young and healthy, but those of us who are not have a big problem,” said a UM graduate student who suffers from serious arthritis and wished to remain anonymous.
The basic GradCare package requires that the student use only U of M doctors, but the University Health Services may not provide certain specialists.

“They want you to go to U of M services, and they don’t provide what you need,” she said.

She said she pays an additional $500 annually in order to see a doctor who she feels is better suited to her needs.

Moreover, some graduate students and university employees complain that co-pays quickly add up to become unaffordable. Although a generic prescription drug costs only $5, when required to buy four or five different medicines monthly, the costs add up.

However, although co-pays may be burdensome and certain specialists may not be available, the UM insurance plan is much more comprehensive than many other university health care plans.

As O’Mahen explains, not only is an effective health care plan important to control costs, it also makes the University more competitive. In the constant competition between universities for the best researchers, professors, administrators, and even residence hall directors, having healthy employees is just another way the University must compete for the “leaders and the best.”

“In order to compete you have to have a fairly good plan,” O’Mahen said.

“Most [faculty and graduate students at the University of Michigan] are fairly elite in their field, so they have mobility,” O’Mahen said.

Employees who are not faculty, however, may not have the flexibility to change jobs in order to find better healthcare. To address this, the University plans on making insurance more affordable for lower income employees.

“In 2010 we are moving to a system where the determination of package is based on salary band. ” said Dave Reid, Communications Director in the University Human Resources department. “People on the lower end of the salary band will pay less than people who earn more.”

So even though some employees may be unsatisfied, when it comes down to it, U of M health care is some of the best you can find.  Even the anonymous graduate student with arthritis admits to choosing to study at U of M because of its health benefits.

There may be flaws, but essentially, the system operates.

If the United States were to adopt a public option, which operated on the same large pool principle as U of M’s, it would seemingly do the same: Mandatory care. Large pool. Low risk. Low premiums.
And those unsatisfied by U of M’s healthcare could buy into the public option.