America is considering the replacement of Obamacare with Trumpcare. This historical cohort revisited pre-Obamacare colon cancer care among people living in poverty in California (N = 5,776). It affirmed a gender by health insurance hypothesis on nonreceipt of surgery such that uninsured women were at greater risk than uninsured men. Uninsured women were three times as likely as insured women to be denied access to such basic care. Similar men were two times as likely. America is bound to repeat such profound health care inequities if Obamacare is repealed. Instead, Obamacare ought to be retained and strengthened in all states, red and blue.
KeywordsColon cancer care; gender; health care policy; health care reform; historical cohort; intersectionality; interaction effect; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; structural inequality; uninsured Various health care acts or Trumpcare are being considered to replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare. If any pass they would increase the ranks of the uninsured and decrease the benefits of all, but the wealthiest Americans while increasing their out-ofpocket costs. People living in poverty would suffer the most, especially the Medicaideligible or near-eligible in so-called red states. Our profession has a tradition of advocating for quality health care for all and we are again called to action (Gorin, 2017; National Association of Social Workers, 2009). This study revisits pre-Obamacare cancer care and reminds us of the profound barriers to basic care that were experienced by uninsured people, especially women in the USA.Canada and the USA share a 5,000 kilometer border and many social and economic characteristics, but provide health care in distinct ways. Canada provides universal access to care via a single, public payer, while the USA provides no such guarantee via multiple , 1997). It tended to mute enthusiasm for Canada-like solutions to America's health care problems as it found no practical survival differences between the two countries. Otherwise well designed, it did not account for socioeconomic factors. Our research group thought such comparisons of national "haystacks" tended to lose important "needles" of knowledge. Consider the diversity of people and places in Canada and the USA: women and men, uninsured to well-insured, residing in high poverty to affluent neighborhoods and so on. Overall comparisons of the average effects of countries are bound to miss knowledge about the unique experiences of important subpopulations. We studied breast and colon cancer care in impoverished places in Ontario and California over the past two decades and observed large Canadian advantages on treatment access and survival. In fact, the more impoverished the people or places the larger were the Canadian advantages that were largely explained by their better health insurance coverage (Gorey, Hamm, Luginaah, Zou, & Holowaty, 2017;Gorey et al., 1997).Focusing on the experiences of socioeconomically vulnerable people in vulnerable places seems to magnify...