Health-Care Reform Around the Web
By John Amick
- The New York Times reports widespread dissatisfaction from Republicans regarding news that President Obama is advocating a government-sponsored aspect to a new health-care package currently under deliberation in the Senate. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) compared any shade of universal care to the the failed health-care reform attempt of 1994. “If the Democrats go ahead with a purely partisan bill,” Hatch said, “you saw what happened on Hillarycare, and this will be just as bad.”
Republicans aren't the only vocal critics of Obama's message. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) voiced his concern with Obama's desire to give the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission more clout in recommending Medicare costs. "I don't think there is great enthusiasm for a take-it-or-leave-it proposal coming out of some commission," Hoyer said.
- Would the reform process be any less painstaking if former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle was around and Sen. Ted Kennedy was healthy?
- The New York Times Sunday Magazine delves into President Obama's relationships on Capitol Hill, mainly through the lense of passing health-care legislation. Though Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) says Obama “didn’t really serve in the Senate,” due to his short time as senator of Illinois, Baucus and the president have kept in close contact on the reform push. A main facilitator: Obama's deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, former chief of staff in Baucus's Senate office.
- Baucus is the focus of CQ's ongoing series on health care. Get used to the flood of Baucus profile pieces to come.
- Paul Krugman on health-care reform: Don’t trust the insurance industry.
- Harvard Business School's Michael E. Porter, known as a leader in competitive strategy, writes in the New England Journal of Medicine his outline for achieving health-care reform by moving toward a value-based system. Porter:
"True reform will require both moving toward universal insurance coverage and restructuring the care delivery system. These two components are profoundly interrelated, and both are essential. Achieving universal coverage is crucial not only for fairness but also to enable a high-value delivery system. When many people lack access to primary and preventive care and cross-subsidies among patients create major inefficiencies, high-value care is difficult to achieve. This is a principal reason why countries with universal insurance have lower health care spending than the United States. However, expanded access without improved value is unsustainable and sure to fail. Even countries with universal coverage are facing rapidly rising costs and serious quality problems; they, too, have a pressing need to restructure delivery."
By
washingtonpost.com editors
|
June 5, 2009; 11:00 AM ET
Categories:
Daily Dose
Save & Share:
Previous: New Study: Bankruptcy Tied To Medical Bills
Next: Obama Says Congress Must Act to Fix 'Broken' Health-Care System
Posted by: lensch | June 5, 2009 1:40 PM | Report abuse
I think most Americans, who are healthy and have access to employer administered health care, are basically indifferent and silent on this issue. Yet the biggest talkers are swayed by the word "Socialist" and fear not universal "healthcare" but fear a universal "line" with the inner-city and will pay the most expensive of premiums to be in a seperate "line". Of course when they ultimately do get sick and then hit with the fine print of their insurance policies they will be just as poor as the inner-city.
Posted by: tanksleyd | June 6, 2009 4:45 AM | Report abuse
If the rest of medicine is in the sad state that musculoskeletal pain medicine is, we are in total chaos. The almost complete reliance on MRIs by physicians and patients shows a total lack of understanding of such pathology (see literature agreement that anatomical diagnosis is not achievable in most cases). Without pain provocation or research on "normal," a static picture is unable to help us understand the problem (see the number studies showing high incidence of MRI false positives in normals). Further, a picture is unable to direct appropriate care (note the wide array of treatments marketed for the SAME picture/diagnosis). Yet, with most other tools of diagnosis even more useless than an expensive picture (e.g. special tests and diagnostic focus on the 1% with extraordinary pathology - cancer, etc.), an enormous amount is spent every year for useless diagnosis and treatment leaving treatment as the only generally understood real diagnostic tool available (e.g. "I'm going to order medications / injections to see if it helps") yet is impractically expensive and neither efficient nor effective (see the number of alternative medicine seekers/people living with pain there are.) Clinicians who read and understand the literature should be the primary informers of health care change, not politicians, theoreticians/ philosophers, technicians specializing in high-priced care with political clout, and others who don't know that the state of the art is so poor. A problem is how to get the voices of those who understand to be heard above the din. Targeted research assistance for promising and quick-to-implement new ideas, well-designed electronic health records to document reliable long-term outcomes, along with health care professions that will work with instead of in competition with each other could be a major part of the solution. Yet because political solutions may only serve the interests of the powerful, the state of the economy driving 2ndary gain (e.g. a need to get disability assistance or the otherwise need to pay off outrageous student loans), and the near total control of at least local government by public employee unions with only one interest, I am pessimistic that best outcome will be reached now. But on the other hand, though you may disagree with their policies, Obama and his crew appear to be some of the most brilliant people on the planet (maybe only by comparison with the last bunch) additionally seeming to be powerful, competent, and not apathetic, which gives us a small chance of something good happening, in my opinion.
Posted by: greenacres2000 | June 6, 2009 6:38 AM | Report abuse
If you would like to help pressure Congress to pass single payer health care please join our voting bloc at: http://www.votingbloc.org/Health_Bloc.php
Posted by: letsgobuffalo | June 6, 2009 6:57 AM | Report abuse
Hello American Express Corporation gave Sen. Max Baucus $50,000 for his campaigns. If you have an American Express card, cut it up and send it to Senator Baucus, Helena, Montana office and include a note telling him that you demand he get S703 single payer insurance enacted into law and until then you refuse to use an American Express card. Also sign these single payer petitions http://bit.ly/single_payer_baucus http://bit.ly/single_payer Thank you. http://www.democratz.org
Posted by: DEMOCRATZoORG | June 6, 2009 7:36 AM | Report abuse
don't trust the insurance industry.
Posted by: bnglfn | June 6, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse
The New York Times reports widespread dissatisfaction from Republicans regarding news that President Obama is advocating a government-sponsored aspect to a new health-care package currently under deliberation in the Senate. New York Times forget to mention that there is bigger and more widespread dissatisfaction from the US citizens regarding the current state of our "health care system". We all love "choices". Why not put up both public and private health plan and let the people choose. If you so love the private plan, go ahead and have one. But for me, I will choose the public plan because the people who runs the public plan will be answerable to me since I AM THE VOTER AND I CAN VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE IF I DO NOT LIKE WHAT THEY DID. For the private plan, I do not have enough money to buy enough of their company shares to have any say or influence.
Posted by: kcleung8947 | June 6, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse
June 06, 2009 The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Greetings President Obama, My name is Jeanette Taylor and I am an independent health insurance broker. I am concerned about the state health insurance exchange system being proposed by Senator Kennedy and others for people to buy health insurance. I read in Senator's Kennedy's proposal that commissions would be drafted by the exchange to pay for administrative costs. I don't understand why the government would set up a health insurance exchange that will also pull a percentage for the premium when we have licensed health insurance brokers already in the field staying abreast on all the issues about coverage and benefits in each of the plans. The government needs to capitalize on the incredible benefits that the independent health insurance broker can offer to the citizens of this country. Independent health insurance brokers remain neutral in the process of helping our clients find the best plan available. I am appointed with all of the major medical insurance companies in my area so that I can give my clients the peace of mind knowing that they have the best options before them. I urge you, for the benefit of the citizens of this country, to tap into the most valuable resource available to the success of your health insurance initiatives: independent health insurance brokers. I ask for your vocal support for the role of an independent health insurance broker in the marketplace. My website has a calculator that anyone can use to see all of the major medical options that are available. I work within my community to help people find affordable health insurance. My job is to educate, inform and protect the welfare of my clients. I look forward to exciting changes in health care reform and to being on the front lines with my client’s best interest at heart. Thank you, Jeanette Taylor Independent Health Insurance Broker www.jtaylorhealth.com 281-213-9267 home 281-386-8891 cell
Posted by: videoart2 | June 6, 2009 11:45 PM | Report abuse
Something that you may not understand is that people dont want any more insurance brokers! We have had it with insurance companies and their brokers! Cya , best to look for another job soon!
Posted by: aster2 | June 7, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse
I just ask that people bet involved. You need to understand, nationalized healthcare means you don't have choice. No matters what nationalized healthcare you look at there is no CHOICE. You have heart pains, sorry next procedure opening for cardiac cath 6 months. How would you like to hear that? That is not instilling fear but truth. Truth because it happened to my family in a nationalized system. Please, PLEASE, do not give up your freedom of choice. Believe it or not this is LIFE OR DEATH; your life or death. At least, if you don't have healthcare coverage currently and go to a ER and you need a heart cath you get one WHEN YOU NEED IT. One other thing to keep in mind. We are currently in a physician shortage now. If the changes most of congress is proposing passes we will lose a lot of physicians who will not stay in this country or will not stay in the business. They we may be waiting because there is no one to treat us. To me this is scary beyond words. I offer one more thought. When Pres. Obama first offered his vision of healthcare reform he wanted a person to head all of healthcare to make decisions to cut costs. This cost cutting is your treatment. You will not be given the treatment that works but the most cost efficient. When it comes to life or death chemo not giving you the treatment that works over money is murder. Remember everything Congress signs and sends on has attachments we never find out those attachments until it is too late.. Let your congress person know how you feel. Make him represent us, please.
Posted by: cinturley | June 7, 2009 8:23 PM | Report abuse
ALL HANDS ON DECK! Howard Dean and the Democrats are correct. "a" (Toothy, Robust, Affordable, Immediate, Triggerless, Medicare-Like ) "public health insurance option" (For All Who Want It) "is more important than bipartisanship, and Democrats should pass health-care legislation that includes the option with 51 votes if necessary." "Democrats should have "no intention" of working with Republicans if it's not the strongest possible legislation that could be passed with a simple majority." (Howard Dean) CONTACT CONGRESS and your representatives Now! And tell them you demand ALL of the minimum requirements above. This is the time for maximal, toothy, sustained pressure on Congress to get this done. Be creative. But be relentless. This is what WE THE PEOPLE gave the Democrats all that power to do for ALL of us. In medicine and healthcare there is only one acceptable standard. And that standard is the HIGHEST level of EXCELLENCE! you can provide for everyone. Nothing less is acceptable for a precious human life. And the White House is right. "Good health care reform is essentially good economic policy." (Christina Romer) BUT HEAR ME WELL! Just as I warned you before 911. Before the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And before the US and Global economic crisis. I must tell you now that healthcare reform is now a critical matter of NATIONAL SECURITY. A-H1N1 (Swine Flu) was yet another loud WAKE-UP! call. And there is MUCH! worse lurking, and poised to strike at any moment. Working against the clock, many of us have known this for a long time now. And this is why we have been pushing so hard for so long without fully saying why. But Congress and the American people are literally running out of time. I'll tell you more later. But get healthcare reform done NOW!. God Bless All Of You jacksmith -- WORKING CLASS
--------
Posted by: JackSmith1 | June 7, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.












"Even countries with universal coverage are facing rapidly rising costs and serious quality problems; they, too, have a pressing need to restructure delivery." This is a seriously misleading state from Mr. Porter. It may be true that other countries' costs are rising, but since they pay less than half per person than we do right now, they have a long way to go. Their quality is still far better as measured by all the bottom line public health statistics. We are in much more trouble right now than they will be in for years to come. Becaue of the enormous waste of profit making insurance companies and high drug prices, we can have a Super Medicare for everybody, and not pay any more than we are now paying. Our system will still not be anywhere near as efficient as those of other countries, but at least everyone will be getting decent health care. This will give us time to work on the really hard problems involving medical practice and philosophical questions like how much do we really want to spend.