This past Wednesday, the Minnesota Public Radio website published an article on First Congressional candidate Allen Quist’s comments about the new federal health care law. Quist argued that the new law might cost married couples up to $10,425 more in health insurance costs than if they lived together unmarried.
Professor Robert Field is quoted in the article. Field comments on the tax credit offered to married couples who pay for health care through the new federal system. Field said, “[married couples] would be eligible for a subsidy at a higher income if it’s a joint income, but it wouldn’t be as beneficial as if you were each buying a separate individual policy.”
In the upcoming issue of the American Bar Association publication Preview, Field also described the history behind current proposed federal health care law claiming that its origins could be traced back to national health care bills proposed during Teddy Roosevelt's presidency all the way through Franklin D. Roosevelt’s term as president. Specifically, Field pointed out that although universal health care was proposed during Franklin Roosevelt’s presidency, F.D.R. “decided not to include universal health care with Social Security for fear that it would be too contentious and sink the entire program.”
Robert Field is a nationally recognized expert on health policy and public health law whose research focuses on ethical issues in managed care, public policy and legal facets of health care reform and genetic screening. Field is the author of "Health Care Regulation in America: Complexity, Confrontation and Compromise," a comprehensive guide to the government's role in regulating health care in the United States published by Oxford University Press.