Addressing racial and economic inequality in California requires policies that improve the material circumstances of those groups in our society who face the greatest hardship. One such group is women of color, and one such policy would be the introduction of universal health care coverage.

The experiences of women of color are highly racialized and tied to the institutional legacies of American slavery, Jim Crow and discriminatory social policies that limit their access to benefits and incarcerate them at higher rates.

Women of color are also subject to disparities when it comes to health care. For example, infant mortality rates are highest for African American women across all education levels. As annual pregnancy-related deaths increase across the U.S., it is low-income, minority women who face the highest maternal mortality rates.

Racialized and gendered health inequalities require bold, creative policies designed to improve the socioeconomic status of women in relation to men. Medicaid already covers 50 percent of births in the U.S., but Medicare only covers people age 65 and older, and can be expanded at the state level to ensure that all births in California are covered by health insurance.

Accordingly, Californians need a system of single-payer, universal health care coverage such as “Medicare for All.”

Countries with universal health care coverage, such as Canada and Britain, have significantly lower maternal mortality rates than the U.S. with 6.5 and 8.6 deaths per 100,000, respectively, compared to 17.4 in the U.S. Universal health care coverage would improve the health of infants and pregnant people by providing free maternity care to all Californians pre- and post-birth.

Since a large share of maternal deaths occur in the postpartum period, the Medicare-for-all system could include incentives to train and license midwives and provide home visiting programs, two evidence-supported methods to improve outcomes for the pregnant person and the infant. Home visits are essential to assess social determinants of health for families such as housing and food access, and to provide mental health support for new parents.

While the Affordable Care Act improved gendered health disparities by requiring that insurance plans include contraceptives and banning gender discrimination for insurance premiums, Medicare for All builds on the ACA and Medicaid expansion to provide quality care regardless of socioeconomic status.

Mirroring Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to provide federal universal coverage, an ideal route for California could begin with a public option. Under the Warren plan, children and families earning below 200 percent of the federal poverty line would be automatically enrolled in the public option with no premiums or cost-sharing, and adults over 50 could opt into Medicare, significantly reducing rates of uninsurance.

Continuing with Warren’s public option proposal, those with employer-based insurance could opt into the public plan with mandatory employer contributions and significant reductions in premiums (capped at 5 percent of income) and copays (capped at 10 percent). The public option would ensure greater bargaining power with pharmaceutical companies (helping to reduce drug prices), pay providers more to incentivize participation, and cover benefits such as prescription drugs, dental and vision.

Thanks to reduced administrative and provider costs when compared to private insurance, Medicare for all would ultimately save money. Over five years, Warren’s transition plan ensures that premiums and cost-sharing would be reduced to zero. This would create a state-level single-payer health care system that, like Bernie Sanders’ proposal, will be funded through wealth, capital gains and income taxes directed at the wealthiest Californians and Silicon Valley corporations. Private plans, which have been steadily increasing in cost for workers while covering fewer services, would be eliminated in favor of the state health plan.

The transition from a public option to a single-payer health care insurance would provide health care access for vulnerable communities, increase competition, drive costs and drug prices down, and reduce health disparities for pregnant people.

Most importantly, it would help to alleviate disparities in health care access faced by low-income women of color. As such, Medicare for All would be an important step toward reducing racial and socioeconomic inequality across California.

Indira D’Souza is the winner of the 2023 University of California, Davis, Center for Poverty and Inequality Research Black History Month Student Essay Contest, from which this commentary was adapted.

Recommended for you

(5) comments

John Charles Ullom

Sigh. Why make this a racial argument when it really an economic problem? Poor women have bad health care outcomes more than well off women. All women should be provided free maternal care. Period. We need more babies!



John Charles Ullom

Thumbs up to a little bit of Socialism? Who are you and what have you done with kiosk?


The thumbs up were only for your observation "Why make this a racial argument when it [is] really an economic problem?"

The letter itself was just typical political activist trash published in the Review and doesn't deserve comment. 👎👎

John Charles Ullom

Well, ok, but you are OK with babies, right?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

More Stories